Slashdot Mirror

US?

What a bunch of arrogant, hypocritical pricks. The whole NSA SHITHOUSE comes down around their ears, with backdoored network devices and eavesdropping on world leaders - then these paragons of fucking virtue blame "cyber war" on individuals in a foreign government?

Why the fuck don't they haul meglomaniac Keith Alexander off of his fucking starship and drag his sorry arse, along with Elmer Fudd^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Michael Hayden, into the dock?

China has a developed diplomatic culture. This type of International behavior from the US is pure "play at home" propaganda, with the diplomatic effect of a bull in a china-shop, so to speak. Offensive, ignorant, unnecessary, and duplicitous.

It's pretty annoying when the only two realistic candidates are the right and far right candidates.

Just because they've rigged the system doesn't mean they're the only "realistic" options. Moreso when the Democrats are pushing right-wing policies that Republicans couldn't get elected to enact.

For the longest time they ran a CDMA market on 800 in some places, and some GSM in others. I think. And I think they were in the process of moving everything over to GSM-HSxPA/4GLTE when they got acquired. Their coverage maps look suspiciously identical to T-mo's now.

Yes, I'm sure they were moving to 4G/LTE because that would let them use T-mo's entire network, rather than regional partners they had originally.

As an aside, do you really think there is any real possibility of a split Lib/Green ticket? You'd have to completely disregard a lot of history and long-term deep ideological disagreement to think such a thing at all practically possible.

I don't think it's impossible. Just very unlikely. With the NSA spying that has people pissed off, it isn't as difficult to imagine, since these two parties have the most consistent views against the spying.

A similar thing happened in the UK recently, with the Conservative Party forming a coalition government with the Liberal Democrat Party. It allowed the Conservatives to implement their solutions to the financial crisis, and allowed the Liberal Democrats to have significant input in their areas of greatest concern such as taxation, civil liberties, the environment, and education.

Basically, if a well known Libertarian held a press conference with the Green Party's candidate from 2012, Dr. Jill Stein, and announced they are looking at a partnership that is focused primarily on ending the government's spying on American citizens, they would get some traction.

That Libertarian could be Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks, or Penn Gillette, of Penn & Teller. (Names chosen from this list: http://www.examiner.com/articl... .) Any well known person who is strongly or devoutly Libertarian, not simply another Republican re-tread.

In my dream, it would go like this. Dr. Stein would be the presidential candidate of the Green-Libertarian Coalition Party. The vice-presidential candidate would be a leading Libertarian, with facial recognition, preferably with strong ties to the media. John Stossel, journalist from ABC's 20/20 is a good example, from that above list. He doesn't have to have strong governing experience, or any at all, since the VP's job is primarily watching the Senate bicker. But our VP does have a position from which he can make his thoughts public.

So, then, what about the cabinet positions? The Secretary of State would have to be of the Green Party, because that is the voice of the administration. The next important position is Attorney General, which would go to the Libertarian Party to fill. For the rest, the Green Party and Libertarian Party pick one at a time to fill, with the Libertarian Party choosing first.

They would have to tell the voters that their purpose isn't to get all of their own people into each Cabinet position. The purpose of this coalition is to get people to forsake the Democrat and Republican parties. Libertarian-leaning Republican voters won't want to support a Green Party Secretary of the Interior, so they should choose that one first to fill. Then so on down the line. Neither party gets exactly what they want, but enough of it to have a voice.

So, if this coalition were to happen, and the announcement was done as described, I think it would get a fair amount of attention, and votes. It probably wouldn't win the 2016 election, but I bet it would get several states' electoral votes, which no third party has done in a long time.

That is stupid anit-gun logic. By that logic, you would be happier to have no police force than to have a bunch of cops gang raping you. Or you would be happier to have no job at all than be stuck in your office while the building burns down. Or, you would rather that a grocery store not exist in your neighborhood than to get botulismfrom one of their products.

That makes absolutely no sense. How does having a gun that only shoots for you but has a small chance of failing equate to any of those things? That's some asinine pro-gun logic right there.

On the other hand, if your son is depressed enough to shoot himself, having a length of rop and rafters, or even kitchen knives is just about as dangerous.

That's simply not true. Gun suicide attempts are vastly more successful than other methods.

If someone is entering your house with a gun, they are doing it to do you bodily harm. If you happen to be a huge man well versed in martial arts, then you likely don't want anyone armed.

Having a gun in your home makes you statistically less safe.

I've never had the desire to own a gun, nor do I see the appeal.

I sincerely hope that if you ever have occasion to regret your irresponsibility, that there is someone smarter than you at hand who is prepared to defend your life.

The really smart people know that owning a gun makes you statistically more likely to be a victim of gun violence.

List of the most dangerous cities in the US for 2013. Detroit is 3rd, right after Flint, Michigan.

That humans are causing climate change isn't a debate anymore. Hasn't been for a long time, the science is fundamental and would require major revisions to fundamental science that we'd have to throw away 50+ years of scientific progress across the board. A whole new system of chemistry, a whole new physics going back to the 1800s (When scientists first started warning about the 'greenhouse effect' after discovering CO2's infra-red properties in the lab) , a whole new system of optics to account for why CO2 appears to be creating banding in the infra-red spectrum, it just goes on and on.

You are very good at chaining together statements and making them sound plausible.

Consider the following statements:

* Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas.

* Global warming has been observed over the last decades of the 20th Century.

* Increasing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will have a warming effect on the world.

So far, any climatologist worthy of the title agrees.

* Carbon dioxide is the only important variable; it is more significant than variations in solar output.

* Feedbacks will make even small increases in temperature "run away" with dire consequences.

* The computer models are sufficiently trustworthy that we need to spend trillions of dollars based on their outputs.

* Geoengineering must never be considered as a solution; only controlling carbon may be considered.

Now I'll give you 20:1 odds that there is far from a "consensus" on these points.

And I'll give you a few "denier" (damn I hate that word) points.

* Warming due to carbon dioxide is not linear. Doubling the CO2 in the atmosphere does not double the warming, and in fact there is enough CO2 in the atmosphere already that almost all the possible warming is already occurring. In other words, adding more CO2 to the atmosphere will not significantly add to the warming.

* The computer models have completely failed to predict the past 15 years of non-warming. We are now outside the "95% confidence" interval of the predictions. There is more CO2 in the atmosphere than ever, yet warming did not increase over the past 15 years. (See above point)

Well it exactly how strange science needs to get for AGW to be false.

The CAGW position, as I understand it:

* Global warming will be catastrophic
* The computer models predict it correctly
* CO2 is the main driver
* "feedbacks" will cause the warming to "run away"

It doesn't take your sarcastic suggestions about the laws of physics no longer working to invalidate any or all of the above. If the "feedbacks" are not correctly modeled, instead of huge temperature increases we would get moderate ones. If the computer models contain errors, they aren't correct. If solar output turns out to be an important factor in warming, and CO2 is already doing almost as much of the warming as it can, then maybe CO2 isn't the most important factor.

In short, there are non-insane reasons why intelligent and informed people can doubt CAGW, and your straw men cannot change that.

Thus the precautionary principle states that even taking into account the small likelyhood we are wrong about it, we've got to do something, as long as the something isn't worse. Climate engineering might be worse, much worse even. Economic intervention however definately won't be (In fact most academic economists think climate intervention would have beneficial effects on the economy)

Oh like hell. The planned "interventions" would cost trillions of dollars. No serious economist thinks this will have beneficial effects on the economy... and if you really think it will, please explain the economic example of Germany, which has spent big large huge money on Green Energy and whose people are frustrated by how expensive it has become.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/01/economist-explains-0

counter point: http://www.examiner.com/articl...
http://www.brainyquote.com/quo...

Natives Americans were fairly populated, just divided into several tribes. Without any major population wiping disease.

This is a random link - I'm sure you can find more with a quick search: http://www.examiner.com/articl...

The only reason that the Europeans had a chance was because the Native American population was already decimated. Not saying that it's "ok" or anything like that, but thems the facts.

Did you even read what you referenced? The whole article is about how the Europeans were responsible for the devastation you're trying to put off on a native plague. The very act of contact is what started the (most likely smallpox) plague that devastated the native populations. The American population was doing just fine until the Europeans showed up.

Explain how tribes can survive after thousands of years without disease?

I'm pretty sure the OP intended to say "new diseases". Obviously they have their own diseases - and their own immunities...they just aren't the same as the rest of the worlds'.

Native Americans used herbs and other plants to heal themselves, and yet today /.ers deny any chance that alternative medicine works.

Yes, because when it's proven to work it's called "medicine".

And what does this say about Europe who used religion as a heal/execute all.

Eh...no comment? People were largely uneducated back then? I'm not sure what the excuse is in this day and age though...

Natives Americans were fairly populated, just divided into several tribes. Without any major population wiping disease.

This is a random link - I'm sure you can find more with a quick search:
http://www.examiner.com/articl...

The only reason that the Europeans had a chance was because the Native American population was already decimated. Not saying that it's "ok" or anything like that, but thems the facts.

I'm not saying that having a large population wouldn't cause such disease, add that fact they lived with there livestock, any disease could jump from human into animal and mutate, or vice verse, and the vaccine for small pox came about because of [essentially] milk maids who didn't get the disease, due to their interaction with the heifers. Their lack of proper hygiene, not deposing of their feces in a proper manner. Contaminating their drinking water with their own feces, animal feces, ect....

Hail dumb luck? Really? What are you getting at? That science is "bad"? By all means - segregate yourself from the scientific community...I don't think you'll be missed.

Have we noticed not only that this story has not been picked up in more mainstream media, but also that one of the other news stories from the same source linked from the same page is this one about how in 1947 the US Navy battled flying saucers protecting Nazis in Antarctica?

Now, the Ukrainian story and the flying saucers and Nazis story might have different truth values, but I wouldn't want to rule out that they have the same one.

This does not mean that I approve of what the Russians are doing in Ukraine, nor, for that matter, the Nazis in Antarctica.

Its like shooting fish in a barrel. As I say they make them every day. Have you never watched it?

You want cites? At random, here's one list of errors Fox News has made and never corrected. Far more than 2 here.

http://www.examiner.com/articl...

Wow that's so much misinformation and tinfoil hat thinking in one place.

Ahhh.. so many of those that died from measles where probably vaccinated but it was not effective?

I'm not even sure what this means as you provide no information. I assume you mean recent outbreaks in which the vast majority occurred because people had not been vaccinated.

So why get it when measles can be beaten with high dose vitamin A?

Again I'm not sure where your misinformation comes from but the WHO recommends high doses of vitamin A with the vaccine to poorly nourished children in developing countries to kill two birds with one stone.

Don't they test these vaccines? Are there any in depth studies of the effectiveness of vaccines?

[Citation please for your misinformation] Decades of research is easy to google btw.

How about Paul "Profit" Offit's poop vaccine?

Again you provide little information on what is in your mind. I can only assume you mean the rotavirus vaccine which he spent 25 years developing. It saves many, many lives a day. For 25 years of research, he gets money from his invention. So what?

How much was that studied before it was rubber stamped as recommended while he was at the CDC?

Does a clinical trial of 70,000 count as rubber-stamping? Again so much misinformation.

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/offit-congressional-reprimand/

If that is your only source of information, I suggest you need to fact check it. For example, it wasn't a reprimand. It was a report. In it, he voted for rotavirus vaccines (and this important) that he did not develop. He abstained from voting for the one he did develop with Merck. As for the rest of the blog, misinformation and outright lies. For example, Hanah Poling's family was awarded money for encephalopathy which is not due to a vaccine. The anti-vaccine crowd claims it was for autism but anyone reading the full report sees otherwise. Misinformation at best.

Pig Pharma is not to be trusted and that is why parents aren't getting their kids vaccinated.

So much bias and irrational thinking there. I assume that you also advice parents not to give children aspirin as well as they also make billions for the industry.

Vaccines are not a bad idea per se for some things, but there is very little ethics in the industry, and as past practices have come to light over the years it does not appear that there ever was any.

[Citation Please] Other than a blog from someone who is completely biased.

I wonder if any of this data was "massaged" by the hadley climate unit ?

http://www.examiner.com/articl...

The best thing about looking for liars is they can be found everywhere, and in
particular where big budgets rely on them lying.

Actually, the creationists think the universe is 6000 years old,

That is demonstrably false.

If you post a retraction, then you will regain some credibility. If you don't, I can't see how you are any better

"On the other side, Mr. Ham was an advocate for the creation story. He said that God created the Earth in six days, and the Earth is only 6,000 years old..."
http://badgerherald.com/oped/2...

"On the Wednesday edition of his TV show, “The 700 Club,” Robertson indirectly implored Ham to put a sock in it, criticizing Ham’s view that the Earth is only 6,000 years old."
http://www.salon.com/2014/02/0...

"Bill Nye debates Creationist Ken Ham: The Earth is not 6,000 years old"
http://www.examiner.com/articl...

Pokemon sells consoles to kids, you're right. Other games work better for other demographics - I know I'm more interested in a new Zelda or Smash Bros. game than Pokemon. However, it doesn't really matter who they sell them to if they're selling out thanks to the franchise's latest release. The 3DS experienced a 135% boost in sales in the month following the release of Pokemon, and it's pretty easy to attribute the majority of those extra sales to Pokemon XY when you consider the historical trend of a spike in system sales just after Pokemon main series game release dates.

Oops, I forgot to say that part. :) They don't want some civilian, or worse a foreign intelligence agency, getting a hold of one.

Ditching in the desert, or ditching in the ocean, as long as it's a hard impact, would scatter pieces. In the ocean, it's much harder to find them and try to figure out how they went together. It's also harder to collect the pieces so others won't find them.

On land, depending on where it hit and who was there, parts or all of it could be retrieved before gov't folks arrived. It would be worse, if it crashed somewhere populated (like downtown San Diego), or somewhere it wouldn't easily returned (like Mexico). The later risks an international incident.

I suspect they opted for water instead of land because of the 2008 F/A-18 crash in San Diego, and others. People get all upset when an airplane crashes in their city.

I'm surprised they don't have pyrotechnics on-board to remove any sensitive equipment. Looking at this report on another crash, they had to go to the crash site to collect the good bits. This one, regarding the same type aircraft says they don't have self-destruct mechanisms, but can wipe their storage if instructed to.

I would have thought a way to make the aircraft a pile of worthless scrap before it hits the ground would have been one of the first things they put on when they decided these would be in a recon/combat role.

"There's no racism because I'm white."

Ah, the old "whites can't suffer racism" canard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_farm_attacks
http://www.examiner.com/article/federal-statistics-of-black-on-white-violence-with-links-and-mathematical-extrapolation-formulas

Now go on talking about white privilege or some other inane rebuttal you undoubtedly have and remember that whites (and jewish people) largely are behind the computer you are typing your response with.

Wow, look at that, a perfectly preserved example of uniformed, ahistorical nonsense intended to provoke smug feelings in other uniformed persons with no historical knowledge. Please note, today's gun controlled cities have a dozen times more crime than the "Wild West" ever had. Stop parroting things and do at least some cursory research.

I think you'll find that the murder rate (RATE - not total which was much lower) was actually lower during the "wild" west than it is today.

The reality is that the the "wild" west is mostly an invention of the mid-20th century movie industry that took a handful of historical events and portrayed it such that people think that it was completely normal for the town to be shot up.

As a matter of fact specifically in Dodge City as you mention from 1870 to 1885 there were a total of 45 homicides, putting the murder rate at 1 per 100k people.
http://www.examiner.com/article/dispelling-the-myth-of-the-wild-west

The current murder rate as of 2010 is 4.8 per 100k for the overall country and is much higher than that in some urban areas.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl01.xls

The simple fact is that the "wild" west wasn't as wild as you'd believe.

The US Federal Government already believes bank safety deposit boxes are fair game, no warrant needed: http://www.examiner.com/article/memo-dhs-can-confiscate-bank-accounts-without-warrant

Food is not a drug.

Bullshit.

Drugs are specifically designed to interrupt or change normal metabolic pathways and processes

Medical dictionary: "A chemical substance, such as a narcotic or hallucinogen, that affects the central nervous system, causing changes in behavior and often addiction." Food fits the entire description.

That drugs take years to make it to market and food does not is to be expected.

The FDA disagrees with you. Apparently, Walnuts are a drug if you make health claims supported by science on your packaging. Cherries have been subjected to the same treatment. So you see, clearly food is a drug, both literally and legally.

(ahem)

I GREW UP in an agriculturally dominated county, sir. I have personally helped raise cattle. I have seen cattle raised in a wide assortment of settings. I can speak quite definitively from personal experiences.

I am very much aware of how factory farms work, and do not support such things. They exist only because of corporate and shareholder greed. They force down the prices of beef so that smaller cattle farmers can no longer compete with more ethical practices, and cause unbelievable amounts of ecological damage. (If you think cattle are bad when crammed together, try swine or chickens.)

However, my "Auntie" is not the ONLY local grower specializing in cattle that uses only grass feeding. For the most part, here's how cattle growing goes down in my local area:

Animals are rotated on pasture in the summer months, then fed silage on a drylot in the winter months (to protect the pasture), with rotations on wheat fields to stimulate the wheat grass (Between the months of january and march, it helps promote the wheat's formation of a centrally dense region that will then spawn the fruiting stalks. Putting the cattle on the wheat increases wheat crop yeilds tremendously, if managed properly. The wheat is highly protein rich at this point, and the fodder is healthier for the animals than the silage-- cheaper too.) For the most part, cattle are not penned up in my area except during extreme weather. However, when the animals are butchering age they are loaded up into cattle trailers and sent to a processing yard, such as at Dodge city. (Horrible place. Really.) The processing yard is where most pictures gracing animal cruelty literature concerning cattle turn up. This is where the cattle get funneled from all over the region to be butchered, processed, and shipped. As a result, very little care is given to accomodate the animals, and they are packed into places like this one.

Prior to that, they are raised in places like this far more often than not. The radical output of factory farms, and the fungible nature of many beef products (especially hamburger) means that the factory fed beef ends up in most beef products, which is unfortunate. The majority of beef growers dont use those methods-- It only takes a few bad apples to spoil the whole barrel.

I see far more cattle raised in those (pasture) conditions overall than I do raised in tight feedboxes, which is what Iowa and pals more frequently do. (that's how they get the texture and flavor of 'Corn fed iowa beef' you know.) this is because of the local economics of the region. Kansas is a grassland biome by nature, and fields left wild will naturally accommodate a setting conducing to raising cattle. It is in areas where this is not the case, or where dense human population expansion pressures prohibit the retention/operation of large pasturage that you see factory farming.

As such, most domestically (in my area) raised cattle are actually born into and raised in reasonably humane settings, it is only in the last few weeks of their lives that they experience the hell on earth most vegans associate with the cattle industry. That treatment actually stresses the animal, and adversely impacts the flavor due to stress hormones making the cattle have altered biochemistry, and reduces the value of the hides through animals fighting each other, and the bruising this causes. The less the animal suffers, the better for the animal, and the better the meat is for the consumer, and the hide is for the tanner. Cattle yards (like the one pictured from Dodge) are simply a consequence of large consumption and "Streamlined" processing. It however, is NOT the processing method my aunt uses.

In addition to large scale processing centers, there are also a very large number of smaller, regional ones serviced by light rail which handle much lower volumes of

Dear Shill,

Just because Obama issues a proclamation, it doesn't mean he can change dully passed law at will.

So what does the ObamaCare Shill's Handbook say about that, shill?

And while you're looking, shill, maybe you could tell us why so many of the 5 million people who have already had their policies cancelled thanks to ObamaCare said they were good policies, and that the new coverage is both worse and more expensive?

You're talking about a time when there were no "rice burners" on the road to stick. Before Detroit caved itself in via unions.

Yes, back then the italians and the brits made cars that handled while America built land yachts with live axle rear suspension that, as stated, are headed straight for the nearest ditch. Yes, literally all of the American sports cars had suspension no more advanced than a pickup truck — they had features like "stiffened sidewalls" for handling... wow! And I do mean wow.

Of course, Ford has continued this tradition. The live axles are gone, except for the Mustang. That will finally go IRS (a couple of special models aside) for 2015, the same year it gets the Ford Fusion grille that really bones the look of the car. I think it looks fine, but it doesn't really look like a Mustang from the front. Also, many of our large cars are now FWD, which is shit. It's okay for little peanut cars, but it's not reasonable to expect the same wheels to do steering and acceleration when the car is large.

American cars have been shit since forever. The only American production car which was provably better than the competition is probably the Model T, which seems a bit of a turd until you realize what a tank it is. And it was horribly complex to operate... The only thing we've done better than the others is the muscle car, and we've already discussed how they are ditch-seeking missiles.

USPS state subsidized? USPS does not depend on any subsidy to survive. It generates its own revenues through sales of stamps and other products.

That statement is only true in theory. Reality is much different. Plenty more coverage here.

Got a work call and accidently posted wrong link...

http://www.examiner.com/article/right-wing-cyber-attacks-on-healthcare-gov-website-confirmed

quote from the link I meant to post

"Destroy Obama Care!", that's the advertised name given to the attack tool by "right wing patriots" who are distributing the DDoS tool through downloads on social networks, which promises to overwhelm the Healthcare.gov website.

"This program continually displays alternate page of the ObamaCare website. It has no virus, Trojans, worms, or cookies. The purpose is to overload the ObamaCare website, to deny service to users and perhaps overload and crash the system," reads the program's grammar- and spelling-challenged "about" screen. "You can open as many copies of this program as you want. Each copy opens multiple links to the site."

"ObamaCare is an affront to the Constitutional rights of the people," it adds. "We have the right to civil disobedience!"

Sorry...wrong link

http://www.examiner.com/article/right-wing-cyber-attacks-on-healthcare-gov-website-confirmed

got a work call in the middle of posting...not trolling.

Can anybody give me a reason not to have stability control where that reasons does not contain “fun” or “because”? (which might be sufficient – just looking for any other reasons.)

'Cause, uh, it's a sports car designed for racing?

Mid-engined cars are designed solely to get around corners fast, and they're extremely unstable compared to your average Ford or Honda. The problem is that many are bought by people who have no clue, and end up in a ditch the first time they take their foot off the gas in a corner.

I have had several mid-engine sports cars, both with and without stability control, and you're wrong, mid-engine is the most stable engine configuration a vehicle can have, otherwise why would F1 cars all be mid-engine?

Mid-engine is so stable that the mid-engine Porsche Cayman is commonly known to be the best handling vehicle money can buy:
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/the-mid-vs-rear-engine-debate-porsche-cayman-r-vs-911-gt3-feature
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-porsche-cayman-cayman-s-first-drive-review
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/the-best-handling-car-in-america-for-less-than-100k-feature
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Porsche_Cayman/Performance/
http://jalopnik.com/is-the-new-porsche-cayman-still-the-worlds-best-sports-333874537
http://www.whatcar.com/car-reviews/porsche/cayman-coupe/summary/26174-4

http://www.examiner.com/article/porsche-cayman-world-s-best-sports-car


For a good example of why mid-engine is better imagine a shopping cart with a 30 pack of beer in it and pushing the cart from the back. Front engine is equivalent to putting the beer in the very front of the cart and mid-engine is equivalent to putting the beer at the back of the cart. Try both and tell me which is easier to push around a corner.

So what do I think happened? Fluke 1-in-a-million accident that couldn't be repeated if you tried.

http://www.examiner.com/article/iran-s-apocalyptic-vision

I'M not sure about that.

Let me help you follow the timeline progression:

2010:

http://www.ibtimes.com/china-russia-currency-agreement-further-threatens-us-dollar-248338

2012:

http://www.examiner.com/article/dollar-no-longer-primary-oil-currency-as-china-begins-to-sell-oil-using-yuan

2013:

http://news.slashdot.org/story/13/10/15/0243230/chinas-state-press-calls-for-building-a-de-americanized-world

Here are your facts:

http://www.examiner.com/article/dollar-no-longer-primary-oil-currency-as-china-begins-to-sell-oil-using-yuan

Enjoy!

This

This

This

This

This

Calling 911 when you life is in danger rarely does any good. Even when it is not screwed up chances of the police showing up in time to stop what you think is about to happen to you are small indeed.

Cops protect cops.

How many cop murders go unsolved? Not many. Why? Because when a cop gets murdered cops think it is important to catch that person. It is not very important to catch your murderer though.

This sounds like bullshit to me. The 2013 Ford C-Max is rated at 47MPG, and a test run by some experienced drivers got 60MPG out of it.

How about the Ford Fiesta ECOnetic at 65MPG?

http://www.examiner.com/article/mr-bean-crash-details-emerge-car-caught-fire

There is ample reason for concern about Russia, China, and even Pakistan.

Number of Russian spies in the UK back to Cold War levels, say security services
Chinese Espionage: Britain's MI5 reports epidemic in spying
China's spies come out from the cold
Pakistani spies 'operating in Britain'

I very much doubt that the US has ever aimed nuclear weapons at the United Kingdom. The Soviets / Russians certainly have. They still come for visits.

RAF catches Russian bombers in UK airspace
Yes, yes, I know, but still. Scramble! Scramble! Russian nuclear bandits at 12 o'clock!': The Kremlin's taunting Britain with Blackjack bombers

No. The House of Representatives is not a head of state, it's an elected body of those to whom the people delegate their authority and in whom the control of the government's purse strings are trusted by the constitution.

The House of Representatives has the duty of starting the budget process, but if the President and the Senate whom also have authority delegated by the people aren't supposed to have a say then why do they?

If the Republicans controlled the Presidency and Senate and the Democrats only held the house how would you feel about the Democrats threatening a shutdown and halting the debt ceiling if they didn't get a program implementing background checks for all gut purchases? That would be funded so it's not much less a budget question than defunding the ACA. Why would that be invalid and the ACA tactic is valid?

My solution is for the government to get as far away from healthcare as possible.

So just to be clear what happens if a poor person shows up at a hospital with a broken arm, or cancer, and they don't even have enough money to pay for pain killers?

I'm going to guess this is code for "Huh, I looked for those hundreds of cases of fraud that I heard Republican X describe in state Y for election Z, and it turned out that of all those hundreds of alleged cases none/virtually none of them turned out to be fraud"

No, it's code for "Sorry, I'm not dumb enough to engage in any game where my opponent is the sole arbiter of the rules."

I'll show you what I mean, like this.

Case 1: An unnamed "former GOP official" (unnamed though maybe identifiable in the source article) who had voted absentee in the past and apparently was told he'd voted absentee this last time too. I couldn't find any follow up. So we have the possibility he actually did vote absentee a while ago and simply forgot, or there was a clerical error that later got cleared up or not (we never got a resolution, surely there's paperwork around the absentee application), or he lied (there are hyper-partisans that would do that), or that some sort of voter fraud occurred, but even if it did would voter ID laws have even fixed it?

Case 2: "A report at the Herald-Bulletin said that a “printing glitch” caused voters in Indiana to be turned away after being told the entire precinct voted absentee."
So not only is the second case nothing to do with fraud, but it actually offers an alternative hypothesis to the fraud allegation in the first case!!

Case 3: "An article at Twitchy says that a number of people reported being told they had already voted." Oooh, this sounds promising. And their damning evidence is.... tweets. Oh yes, someone tweeted it so it must be true! Just check out their brilliant reporting
How many have actually gotten away with it? These Twitter users claim that they have.

"Voted voted voted! I voted three times."

Yeah, because that person couldn't possibly be joking or trolling!

Case 4: The Blaze (Glenn Beck's org, that's reliable!). Showing an unidentified person claiming to have voted multiple times on FB. Oh no! It's way harder to make up things on FB than Twitter!

Now, you'll argue some variant of "Well, I said 'significant' and for all you know these individuals were an anomaly, unless you can provide documentation of whatever arbitrary figure I decide is 'significant', I'm going to ignore your cases of voter fraud".

Here's another one.

But to be fair, these are not illegal aliens, they are non-citizens who are registered to vote and cast ballots in our elections.

LK

So note that the vast majority of these cases of non-citizens registering are just peo

Weird, I wasn't aware the US was a Constitutional Monarchy where the Senate is a rubber stamp and the Head of State a figurehead. I thought when all three branches had a saw they had roughly proportional power.

No. The House of Representatives is not a head of state, it's an elected body of those to whom the people delegate their authority and in whom the control of the government's purse strings are trusted by the constitution.

I didn't ask you to have the government solve all the problems, I asked you to give a solution. If you wish that solution can be take the government out of healthcare entirely but actually give an alternative.

My solution is for the government to get as far away from healthcare as possible.

I'm going to guess this is code for "Huh, I looked for those hundreds of cases of fraud that I heard Republican X describe in state Y for election Z, and it turned out that of all those hundreds of alleged cases none/virtually none of them turned out to be fraud"

No, it's code for "Sorry, I'm not dumb enough to engage in any game where my opponent is the sole arbiter of the rules."

I'll show you what I mean, like this.

Now, you'll argue some variant of "Well, I said 'significant' and for all you know these individuals were an anomaly, unless you can provide documentation of whatever arbitrary figure I decide is 'significant', I'm going to ignore your cases of voter fraud".

Here's another one.

But to be fair, these are not illegal aliens, they are non-citizens who are registered to vote and cast ballots in our elections.

LK

In my opinion all the below have been for good, in particular operation Tunisia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Tunisia

http://www.examiner.com/article/anonymous-exposes-pedophile-ring-hacks-lolita-city

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/02/anonymous_vs_scientology_partner/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Payback#Operation_Avenge_Assange

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/westboro-baptist-church-hacked-anonymous-protest-newtown-shooting-victims-funerals_n_2315070.html

Apple has no reason to censor anything, there's lots of complaints on the forums already

And yet they do it. Frequently. Here's a few more examples.

It's an example of how 95% of cyclists in my city and many others ride.

ANECDOTES ARE NOT EVIDENCE. You used it to support your claim that all cyclists are law-breaking, reckless, and cause their own injuries.

Cyclists are not reckless compared to anyone else using the road, and their behavior is substantially less reckless given that when they commit the same traffic infractions, they only endanger themselves. NYC counts cyclist-on-ped injuries and they account for less than 1% of total pedestrian injuries; the other 99% are motor vehicles.

Further, your claim that this reckless behavior equates to causes of injuries and deaths, is also bullshit. There are numerous studies and reviews that disprove this myth.

Again: just like women who blame rape victims for getting raped (she was drunk, she was dressed inappropriately, she shouldn't have been on that street, she shouldn't have been alone, etc) you're constructing a myth to convince yourself that you're better, and won't get injured or killed because you're better. You're doing it again, sanctimoniously talking about sport/recreational riders now (what does their clothing have to do with it?) Some day, a driver is going to do something illegal, you're not going to be able to avoid it despite how amazingly awesome a perfect bike rider you are in your non-spandex shorts. Then you'll get to witness first-hand the victim-blaming crap I've experienced.

Here's some real facts and studies:

Australian helmet cam study: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/study-blames-drivers-for-bike-crashes-20101122-18330.html

London study: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/drivers-to-blame-for-twothirds-of-bicycle-collisions-in-westminster-8602166.html

UK-wide study: http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study

Toronto study which found cyclists at fault in TEN PERCENT of crashes: http://www.examiner.com/article/study-claims-cyclists-at-fault-only-10-percent-of-crashes

I have an older version, but effectively the injury/death rate is mostly effected by poor decisions by the cyclist, not the car.

First off, "the car" doesn't do anything. The driver does. You're attributing behavior to an inanimate object, something I see people do constantly.

Second: several decades of research proves your claim wrong. Most collisions are due to the driver doing something illegal, sometimes simply failing to yield because they think they have right-of-way over someone on a bicycle.

Australian helmet cam study: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/study-blames-drivers-for-bike-crashes-20101122-18330.html

London study: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/drivers-to-blame-for-twothirds-of-bicycle-collisions-in-westminster-8602166.html

UK-wide study: http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study

Toronto study which found cyclists at fault in TEN PERCENT of crashes: http://www.examiner.com/article/study-claims-cyclists-at-fault-only-10-percent-of-crashes

The list goes on. Keep in mind that studies which are based off police reports that aren't carefully analyzed are typically faulty because police very often incorrectly side with motorists, don't interview cyclists, witness statements are wrong, etc. It's common to review a report, see obvious signs that the motorist did something illegal, and police do not cite them, and often cite the cyclist.

This guy was hit and two witnesses and the driver claimed he ran a red light; police tried to give him a ticket for running the light. He knew he hadn't. He found video from a traffic camera showing very clearly that he was cut off by the driver - what we call a "left cross": http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/19284/it-must-have-been-your-fault-cmon-you-are-a-biker/

It should make you stop and think to consider that many cyclists ride with helmet cameras. There's a reason - drivers lie, police don't believe us (or very often we're incapacitated or otherwise unable to defend ourselves), and witnesses are discriminatory towards cyclists or simply don't understand traffic laws or think they saw what they didn't.

It's disingenous to suggest a gun control measure that affects a tiny part of an open country is indicative of any likely result of any future legislation that affects the whole of the nation.

Now you're just blatantly moving the goal-posts... Neither you nor anyone else mentioned nation-wide regulations specifically.

However, there ARE plenty of examples of those as well:

http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jun/28/opinion/oe-lott28

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323468604578245803845796068

http://www.examiner.com/article/gun-statistics-cast-doubt-on-weapons-ban

Where is the evidence of this sharp rise, where is proof of the correlation?

I linked to many, and you're just playing dumb and pretending it's not there. You can use any of those as a jumping off point to get even more facts and figures. But of course, you don't WANT to do that, and would rather feign ignorance.

Sorry, but the news doesn't get better if you change the source. Could the issue be that you need your news politically vetted?

Benghazi Providing Rich Material For An 'All the President's Men' Sequel?

“Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency’s missions in Libya have been subjected to frequent, even monthly, polygraph examinations,” Drew Griffin of CNN Special Investigations Unit reported on August 1. (In the same report, it was revealed that 35 CIA agents were at the Benghazi compound that night.) One source, said Griffin, called this “an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency’s Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.” At the same time, some CIA operatives, it was reported elsewhere, were being forced to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDA).

“The reports on the non-disclosure agreements are accurate,” Congressman Frank Wolf (R-VA) told me at the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi conference, held at Heritage. Additionally, he said, he was called by “a person on the scene in Benghazi, asked to sign another NDA, and he wouldn’t do it, so therefore he has a lawyer downtown to fight this with regard to his career.”

Rep Wolf Says Benghazi survivors were forced to sign non disclosure Agreements

They already have ones that wirelessly charge people and their dogs.

http://www.examiner.com/article/new-yorkers-and-dogs-risk-electrocution-on-city-streets-how-to-be-safe

Thank you for posting a reminder as to why I'm glad I don't live in New York.

They already have ones that wirelessly charge people and their dogs.

http://www.examiner.com/article/new-yorkers-and-dogs-risk-electrocution-on-city-streets-how-to-be-safe

Worst? Depends on definition.

Ahead in the numbers? Yes.

http://www.examiner.com/article/atheist-vs-christian-whose-killed-more-and-who-will-survive

I don't really like the Republican party any more. They're running the country into the ground. But listening to how hateful the liberals are, and how they wish death to their political opponents (see list below), I can't really support them either. I don't want to be a member of the party of hate. So for now I'll be an independent.

That being said, if even a few of the below links are accurate, wouldn't you protect yourself from the left, who profess to want their political opponents to die?

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyharnden/9757837/

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/07/16/dan-savage-hbos-real-time-i-wish-republicans-were-all-f-king-dead

http://www.examiner.com/article/liberal-talker-mike-malloy-says-he-wants-gop-literally-dead

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItcqrHLZGDg&feature=player_embedded#!

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/media-research-center-documents-liberal-death-wishes-against-conservatives

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/the-dark-side-of-liberalism-death-threats-to-conservatives-and-racist-threats/question-3628447/

Miss. The majority of the homeless here (San Francisco, where you obviously are not) are mentally ill. Unlike our immigrants - legal or otherwise - they do not as rule have jobs. Furthermore, many of them were shipped here illegally by irresponsible jurisdictions in distant areas of the country.

You can't make an argument about the wisdom of large nations accepting immigrants on a net basis, by referring to a particular public health issue in a single city.

Recent studies indicate that 30% of chronically homeless persons are mentally ill, while 50% of homeless persons are substance abusers. there is some overlap in these two groups: http://homeless.samhsa.gov/ResourceFiles/hrc_factsheet.pdf

According to this 2010 article, the last survey that linked homelessness and illegal immigration occurred in 2005; according to the article, when people who have "fallen off" unemployment roles are considered, the U.S. is at an average 16.9% unenployment, far higher than the current figures, which consider only those receiving unemployment, would have you believe. The article claims that illegal immigration contributes to homelessness not through arriving and subsequently being homeless themselves, but by providing a cheaper "under the counter" labor force which displaces unemployed legal residents from obtaining those jobs. Here's the article: http://www.examiner.com/article/illegal-immigration-contributing-to-homeless-crisis

But I'm still not convinced we should let engineers start micromanaging bodily functions, when all they are worried about is the device and the energy consumption.

It can't be all bad, for every electric shock to make someone pee their pants, there's bound to be a different shock to get me to stand every now and then as I'm playing WoW in the basement. I don't want to end up like this guy or this guy, after all.