Slashdot Mirror

A common meme is: "The Republicans already tried to look into this and couldn't make anything stick. So clearly Hillary Clinton was innocent and the Republicans are just digging for dirt and hoping to find something." Variations on this have already been posted in this discussion.

What's extraordinary here is that the Director of the FBI intervened personally on Hillary Clinton's behalf. He wrote a draft of his speech exonerating her before the FBI ever interviewed her. Her aides were given broad immunity, which is usually used to compel people to talk[1], but then they were allowed to just say things like "I don't remember". Hillary Clinton, or someone working for her, wiped her email server after a subpoena was issued requiring her to hand it over to Congress, and there were absolutely no consequences from that. A usual FBI investigation would collect as much evidence as possible as early as possible, but that wasn't done in this case... the Anthony Weiner/Huma Abedin copies of Hillary Clinton emails were found during an investigation of Weiner, but they should have been found earlier. When the FBI is actually investigating they are thorough about collecting evidence. They should have grabbed every computer Hillary ever touched, and as Huma Abedin was an aide to Hillary, every computer Huma ever touched. (They could have copied the hard disks and given the computers back right away.)

Most extraordinary of all: the Director of the FBI claimed that "no reasonable prosecutor" would prosecute Hillary Clinton as no proof of ill intent was found, yet the laws she broke do not require intent but only require proof of mishandling of data.

...prosecutors are not required to prove motive. [...] Clinton could have been prosecuted either for willfully mishandling classified information or for doing so through gross negligence.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447209/hillary-clinton-e-mail-investigation-grand-jury-subpoenas

Consider what happened to David Petraeus. He was guilty, but what he did wasn't even a tenth as serious as what Hillary Clinton did. But the Director of the FBI didn't whitewash the investigation for him, so his career was over. (By the way, he didn't go to prison, so he still got better treatment than the "little people" would get. Consider the case of Bryan H. Nishimura. I would say that what Nishimura did wasn't even a thousandth as serious as what Hillary Clinton did, but he was treated much more harshly than she was. Note that he wasn't charged with any "intent", just the mishandling of data.)

I'm pretty sure that if a member of the Trump administration mishandles classified data, he or she won't get the special treatment that Hillary Clinton got. But the Democrats will get a President elected again sometime in the future and I would like to get a precedent established that the laws apply to Democrats as much as to Trump and his staff. I know that the law is not enforced perfectly even-handedly in this country (or any country in the real world) but I am appalled at the epic whitewashing done on behalf of Hillary Clinton to protect

Republicans are crackheads in 2017 lol, thanks for demonstrating.

Read about how compromised Meuller is by the Russians.....

Democrats painted the Russians as the source of all evil, and now we find how closely their money followed Obama and the Clintons around....

I guess your trolling didn't turn out like you hoped.

Bah.

Let’s put the Uranium One scandal in perspective: The cool half-million bucks the Putin regime funneled to Bill Clinton was five times the amount it spent on those Facebook ads — the ones the media-Democrat complex ludicrously suggests swung the 2016 presidential election to Donald Trump.

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

Spin that any way you want, everyone knows by now that she's a corrupt pawn on the global russian chessboard.

Citation needed.

http://time.com/4783932/inside-russia-social-media-war-america/
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/us/politics/russia-facebook-twitter-election.html
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/06/trump-putin-and-the-new-cold-war
https://www.newsmax.com/Politics/james-clapper-absolutely-russia-interfered/2017/05/30/id/793102/
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/448931/vladimir-putin-russian-election-interference-american-incompetence-weakness-helped-it

I'd lay off the magic mushrooms.

Yeah, I know-- don't bother saying it: you're not going to read any of these because "that's all fake news because the mainstream media lies". Yeah. When you dismiss everything that confronts your entrenched position, yes of course you will never change your mind.

They said "physical damage"... emotional damage isn't really considered physical.

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

.Civil Forfeiture is an immoral and most likely Unconstitutional act.

The Trump administration loves civil forfeiture. They've expanded it in every way, and have overturned all of the limitations that the Obama administration placed on it in 2015. There will be more asset forfeiture until the Trump regime is safely out of power.

https://www.thestreet.com/stor...

http://observer.com/2017/07/do...

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

I whole-heartedly agree that any connection that I pay for

You pay for Amtrak's WiFi — the cost is included in your ticket.

Nope!

Check your ticket again.

That's a perfectly valid argument, yes. My point is, an equally valid argument can be made for filtering this or that in such and such circumstances. Letting the government decide, which argument is reasonable and which is not is tyranny — it gives the bureaucrats undue powers over private enterprises.

Nope. Check the meaning of tyranny again.

The only reliable fount of service quality rising and prices lowering is competition. If one ISP blocks something unreasonably, another would attract those customers, who disagree. Switching is much easier and faster than petitioning the FCC — especially, when the ISP's CEO plays golf with the President and otherwise lobbies the regulators.

Nope. Especially not on Trains.

I whole-heartedly agree that any connection that I pay for

You pay for Amtrak's WiFi — the cost is included in your ticket.

It would be unusable if [...]

That's a perfectly valid argument, yes. My point is, an equally valid argument can be made for filtering this or that in such and such circumstances. Letting the government decide, which argument is reasonable and which is not is tyranny — it gives the bureaucrats undue powers over private enterprises.

The only reliable fount of service quality rising and prices lowering is competition. If one ISP blocks something unreasonably, another would attract those customers, who disagree. Switching is much easier and faster than petitioning the FCC — especially, when the ISP's CEO plays golf with the President and otherwise lobbies the regulators.

If San Francisco were to make conservative speech illegal

They would be in violation of the First Amendment.

Yeah, no way anyone could beat a cop unconscious with their bare hands.

If you don't, you're the fascist.

The only difference between the skin heads and Antifa is the flag they wave.

Antifa and the Alt-Right, Growing in Opposition to One Another

That is total bullshit. No one is saying every Republican is a Nazi.

No? You sure? Oh, well...It looks like there are people saying every republican is a nazi and read the articles, it's got some choice quotes of plenty of liberals, democrats and progressives saying just that. That's the political elite saying that.

Antifa are an actual group. You can find chapters of them all over europe, canada, they've been spreading in the US for at least 3 years. They're no different then american-centric versions like BAMN(by any means necessary), they run in the same circles. Claiming to be anti-fascist, pro-communist/lennin/marxist/or some mix. If you think it's a virtue signal, then you apparently missed the berkeley riots, which was the handywork of bamn and antifa.

In other words: You either live a very sheltered life, or are a shill.

I'm saying if you find a fire burning the forest, you can't assume that it was man made. I don't exclude the possibility, but the AGW "climate scientists" have yet to show anyone real proof that the 0.1C rise in the last 17 years was man caused or indicative of a coming apocalypse. If it wasn't, we are pissing away $7,000,000,000 a year in the US alone that could be better spent on health care for the poor, job training for the unemployed (literally just about anything). And that doesn't even consider all of the private sector spending that could be better spent elsewhere...

AGW crowd: "CO2 levels are increasing" Nope, they lied and the cat is out of the bag. They cherry picked the scientific measurements made pre-industrial revolution to fit their narraive instead of including all the data, which agrees well with what we see today regarding CO2 levels. http://drtimball.com/2012/pre-...

AGW crowd: "CO2 blocks IR from escaping, more is bad!" Nope, CO2 in the atmosphere already blocks 100% of the IR in the bands that it reflects IR and the 100% reflection happens well below 100PPM (current levels are maybe 440PPM with historic SCIENTIFIC pre-industrial measurements between 250-550PPM)...

AGW crowd: "All scientists believe in AGW!" Nope, that lie was based on a survey of 160 climate scientists, of which 77 responded. That is hardly all scientists.
http://www.nationalreview.com/...

AGW crowd: "You are evil and you want everyone to drown from sea level rise!" Nope, sea levels are projected to rise between 0.5 feet and 6 feet. It is trivial for us to build 20 ft sea walls, and they could already be built around all endangered, inhabited coastline for what we have spent on AGW research and development in the last 5 years in the US alone ($35,000,000,000). If global warming really will continue as AGW nuts project and they really were concerned, then they should encourage the redirection of their funding to start building the sea walls.... but it is not real, it is just a cash cow for the AGW green industries and research grant industry.

AGW crowd: "But, but, it feel AGW is real, and I'm terrified!" The rest of society: STFU already http://insider.foxnews.com/201...

Not a hoax invented by the Chinese (nice strawman though), a hoax invented by the climate "scientists" to drum up funding. Look at US governmental funding of climate studies from the 1960s vs today (hint: we spend over $2,000,000,000 per year on AGW research and another $4,000,000,000 per year on climate technology research. That is a shit ton of cash and a business that extorts about the same amount of money from the American people as Comcast; at least Comcast provides a semi-useful service... It is exponentially larger because these "scientists" have convinced a decent segment of the population (mostly liberals lacking in a hard science education who are looking to virtue signal their fellow liberals) and enough politicians (also looking to virtue signal) that there is a crisis...

We should already be dead and the earth a ball of fire based on their computer models, which were wildly wrong, but the AGW crowd still call it "science" and keep believing because they have no clue and no background in hard science. I am one of those mythical scientists who do not accept AGW (another lie pushed hard by the AGW crowd, the 97% number is a joke and only surveyed 160 "climate scientists". http://www.nationalreview.com/...

Everyone is a "genius" on the internet, but as background, I hold a PhD in applied thermodynamics and have worked in applied thermodynamics for nearly twenty years, along with teaching for several years at university. I work/design with the underlying physics every day and have thoroughly investigated the AGW claims and the so called "science" and most of it is hand waving, computer modeling with thousands of fudge factors not based on first principles and flat out speculation by PhDs who have never done anything in the real world (100% theoretical work). If they were in any of my Thermo classes, most of the jokers would fail outright.

Let me lay out a few facts for you. If you are truly interested in science, they should be informative:

Fact: there were higher measured CO2 levels 150 years ago before the ICE and the industrial revolution: http://drtimball.com/2012/pre-...

Fact: current global CO2 levels are a myth, "global" CO2 levels are measured at a single recording station in Hawaii where levels can vary 600PPM or more in a single day (the smooth graphs you see are computer generated lies created by averaging and smoothing algorithms.

Fact: global temperature is a myth. Temperature on the planet varies dramatically from the equator to the poles, day and night, season to season, elevation, ocean depth, surface temperature, atmospheric temperature, cloud cover, vegetation type, rainfall levels, regional geography, etc. Any of those factors plus others can cause the local temperature to vary 20-40C. Global temperature is an estimate based on fallible computer models that try to compensate and calculate using many local measurements and a bunch of fudge factors (numbers pulled out of someone's ass). Satellite measurements are also factored in to this model, but again, at a single site, temperatures can swing 20C in a single day night cycle, and easily double that from season to season. However, somehow we are supposed to believe them when they assure us that the planet has warmed 0.1C in the last 17 years (well within the margin of error, which has never been well defined, let alone validated for their global temperature model). http://ete.cet.edu/gcc/style/i...

Far too many people worship "science" instead of understanding it and practicing it, probably because they are too emotional and not intelligent enough to do the later, so my posts get mod-bombed by ignorant, self righteous idiots looking to virtue signal with mod points... Regardless how accurate they are.

But we do not bear him any ill-will, we are not out to shut him up or cause him harm.

So all those death threats to trans people are writing themselves?

There is a large segment of society which disapproves of or questions that lifestyle yet tolerates it peaceably. If there are "all those death threats" and if indeed they are not hoaxes, it in no way contradicts that assertion. It would show that there exists some other group which is intolerant.

The leftists are a small minority with all the power.

Which is why democrats received a plurality of the popular vote in the last three presidential elections.

No. You need to evaluate overall trends, not consider a single election. That single election is not representative of nationwide electoral trends because Donald "Grab them by the pussy" Trump was an uncharacteristically miserable candidate. Republicans are taking over everywhere else: Congress, state legislatures, state governorships.

Leftists are especially unpopular within the Democrat party. Blacks are ideological enemies pro-homosexuality progressives and black children suffer terribly in failing Democrat-controlled unionized public schools. Working-class Democrats are flipping over to Republican.

The leftist, progressive ideologues are extremely unpopular with most of the public. But they are entrenched in positions of power in profitable mega-corporations, in the schools, in the universities, in federal bureaucracies, non-profits and the news media.

They destroy careers by firing and blacklisting.

Like how Trump wanted to fire all the DoE employees that believe in climate change?

Fake news generated by union propagandists. Look it up. Trump never said that and there is no evidence that he tried to do it. The sole basis for that accusation is innuendo from public employee union officials reported credulously by left-wing newspapers.

They use the force of law to arrest, fire and harass dissenters.

This one is extra insane. I don't even know what you are talking about here. Are you under the impression that law enforcement, a current major target of liberal outrage, is somehow under the control of leftists? Literally wtf.

Leave it to a leftist to decree that facts are "insane."

When leftists control law enforcement they they corrupt it.

Oh, and there is this.

Then there was Obama's IRS illegally attempting to sic the FBI on tea party groups.

Followed by your allies in the media pronouncing that we "hate government," "oppose education" and "deny science" because we are incensed by corruption of those institutions and endeavors to serve your own ideological and political ends.

Isn't that what every group in power tries to do?

No.

Your guys are doing it right now, and have done it before.

The announced plan is to shut down large sections of government and fire the officials so to prevent abuses, not to redirect abuses to the other party. "Drain the swamp," as the guy said. The fewer government bureaucrats, the fewer government bureaucrats who can abuse their authority for political ends. Given that Trump is an idiot, it seems unlikely that he will achieve much reduction in government. Though he has made some progress in firing VA employees.

That is seemingly the entire point of government.

You need some historical perspective.

Why would you take one failed 3rd world country

Venezuela, Cuba, Eastern Europe before 1990, the USSR, North Korea, China's Great Leap Forward, Cambodia, National Socialists in Germany, etc.

It's a long list and I'm sure someone could make it longer.

And Venezuela wasn't a "failed country" before Chavez.

The Scandanavian countries have some of the highest standards of living in the world and would definitely be considered "socialist" by your view

Not sure what you think "my view" is. But Swedish Americans, Danish Americans, Finnish Americans all have a 50% higher standard of living than respective Swedes, Danes, and Finns living in the Nordic countries.

It's also called being part of a society rather than some Randian utopia of self centered greed.

Yay for straw men. What would we do without them?

But OK, I'll agree that socialism doesn't always disasterously fail everyone, everywhere. And free markets don't always help everyone.

But that doesn't mean we can't look at China today vs. Great Leap Forward China, or Venezuela before and after Chavez and learn some lessons.

For example, maybe only Scandinavians can succeed at socialism while everyone else is doomed to fail at it. So places where the population isn't nearly 100% Scandinavian should stay far away. That seems to fit the pattern.

Can you learn?

https://fee.org/articles/the-m...

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

https://sweden.se/culture-trad...

https://stream.org/5-myths-nor...

It's mostly a myth.

Oh, it looks like I found where some of that Canadian healthcare money is coming from.

Canadian defence spending among lowest in NATO . . .
Military expenditure (% of GDP)

Maybe the US should stop picking up the slack for NATO.

Hmmm....

Report Says Canada’s Socialized Medicine Failing Canadians

Canada’s socialized health care is driving more than 63,000 Canadians out of the country for medical assistance — largely to the U.S.

A new report from the Fraser Institute, a conservative think-tank, estimates that more than 63,459 Canadians traveled to find the health care that is often unavailable in Canada, usually due to long wait times for operations. That number is a 40 percent increase from the previous year, CTV News reports.

The Pitfalls of Single-Payer Health Care: Canada’s Cautionary Tale

At this point, and with the way Trump is treating Sessions,

I'm not convinced that's a real thing. Sessions is part of Trump's core appeal to people who still think law and order are on the brink of breaking down, with drug-addled black lives matters activists plotting to murder us all.

The part of the right wing that hasn't completely abandoned reality recognizes crime is at a 50 year low., but there's a big contingent that doesn't believe evidence is important when dealing with crime.

Without Sessions focusing the right wing's fear onto the usual target of black men who use drugs, it might be tough to keep them distracted from questions about crimes inside the white house. Trump could easily be dumb enough to not realize that, but I have to think whoever of his allies he listens to realize it. That line in the interview was just part of the usual stream of consciousness coming out of the POTUS' mouth. He likely forgot he said it a minute later.

Furthermore, I'm skeptical how much Sessions actually recused himself. I have no proof he was or is meddling with the investigation, but why would we just assume anyone in the administration has done behind closed doors what they said they would? For that matter, even a more respectable administration, why would we just take their word for it?

Until Trump gets impeached and Sessions carries out whatever role he is supposed to play in the process, I'm going to remain convinced this whole "Trump and sessions breakup!?!?" is just another plan to distract attention from Russia, tax cuts for the wealthy, and the health care repeal.

...then every pervert posting illicit upskirt pictures of women without permission is a champion of the first amendment.

Many of the interviewees huff about the First Amendment, and yet not one of them explains how “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” applies to publishing a sex tape made without permission. A Florida jury was asked to consider the following questions: Was posting the video offensive to a reasonable person? Was it devoid of news value? Did Gawker founder Nick Denton participate in posting the video? The answers to the first and third questions are hardly debatable. As for news value: If Hogan’s sex tape is fair game, whose isn’t? Given that women are the usual targets of this sort of thing, it’s surreal to hear so many members of the supposed Party of Women (TM) say that there is a legitimate public interest in viewing any famous person’s bedroom activities. Try to imagine liberals making the case that Breitbart has the First Amendment right to publish a covertly recorded sex tape involving, say, Tina Fey or Rachel Maddow simply because some sleaze merchant shopped it to them.

Asked in a deposition about what celebrity sex tapes he wouldn’t publish, one Albert J. Daulerio, another former Gawker editor and the author of a snarky blog post accompanying the Hulkster’s sex tape on the site, is seen saying, “If they were a child.” Under what age? “Four,” he says, and the jury that heard this could no longer entertain any doubts about the sort of people with whom it was dealing.

/oblg. Airport Logic ?

---
TSA, noun, Theater Security Airhead.

In 2012, TSA global strategies chief John Halinski was asked directly whether there had been a single arrest or detention on terrorism charges creditable to the implementation of whole-body scanners. He answered that there was not.

Since you clearly aren't a "gullible" "idiot," do you think someone with your mental powers could help get this all-Democrat mess get straightened out?

Why universal health care died in California

Should be easy for you, right?

California’s Single-Payer Healthcare Bill Isn’t Based in Reality

You forget private institutions have their own biases. Care to call the tobacco industry fair minded and interested in the public weal?

You forget that government institutions generally, and their employees specifically, have their own biases and interests that are separate from, and sometimes in opposition to, those of taxpayers and other parts of the government. People can use their government positions to pursue their personal interests that aren't necessarily tied to the purpose of their employment, the mission of their agency, or the reason behind the funding.

Meltdown at the EPA

Teachers unions look out for the interests of teachers first, not those of students or schools.

Much of the growth in the cost of education, especially college, is for administrative staff that have nothing to do with instruction.

And didn't you know that Newtonian Physics Is ‘Oppressive’ to Marginalized People?

Explain how a wind turbine or a solar panel generating electrical energy is creating pollution.

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

http://cyprus-mail.com/2017/06...

Nuclear is fine until your have an accident.

Solar power is fine until someone falls off a roof. Nuclear power is the safest energy source we have today.

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/...

Solar power is expensive, unreliable, toxic, and just generally a bad idea. Nuclear power is ten times safer, ten times cleaner, ten times more reliable, and just generally a better idea ten times over.

The tax treatment of oil companies isn't uniquely beneficial to them. Their tax burden per dollar sales is in line with other industries. They pay their share of taxes. These are NOT subsidies, the big oil companies pay LOTS in taxes too.

These subsidies for wind mostly ARE: http://www.nationalreview.com/...

And an Oh By the Way.... Wind couldn't make it on it's own w/o the subsidies. Why? Because it doesn't make enough money to pay for itself.

http://mobile.wnd.com/2017/01/...

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

For two. More?

That is a bunch of nonsense, there is nothing to do with the GOP there.

Fascists and Nazis get listed, but those are Left ideologies - socialists, national socialists. Oh sure, they're to the "right" of Communism, but still in the progressive camp. White Supremacists doesn't get you very far away from the Nazis so there is nothing much anywhere close to the GOP. It is actually kind of funny to think that someone is trying to pin "racism" on the party formed to free the slaves, and that fought segregation. Not even the "anti-government" stuff gets close. The GOP is for limited government, fiscal responsibility (at least officially), and personal liberty, not an absence of government.

Misconstruing Mussolini
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
Hitler, Mussolini, Roosevelt

British Fascists To the Left

More on the BNP’s success at stealing labor votes. Here are some wonderful posts about the BNP by Daniel Hannan. For instance:

Incidentally, any BBC presenters reading this, why do you keep calling the party “far Right”? Weren’t you listening to Nick Griffin’s acceptance speech? He wasn’t going to talk about immigration policy he said, since everyone knew where he stood on the subject. No, his priority was to expose the way in which public assets had been privatised. Look at the BNP’s manifesto: it wants nationalisation, subsidy, higher taxes, protectionism and (sotto voce) the abolition of the monarchy. And look at where its votes came from. The BNP is a symptom of Labour’s collapse.

Plus readers might remember his interview with Vox Day:

VD:One thing that tends to confuse Americans is that the British National Party is not very popular despite holding what appear to be populist views on immigration and the European Union. Why do they enjoy so little support compared to the three major parties?

DH:Because they are, contrary to the way they are described in the BBC, a party of the far left. They’re in favor of nationalization, they’re in favor of protectionism, they want workers’ councils to run industry, they want a massive state program of rebuilding manufacture. Like Hayek said about the socialist roots of Nazism, they are a national socialist party and the socialist bit is very important to them. Plus, there is a line, a very important line in politics, between being anti-immigration and anti-immigrant. And they’ve crossed that line.

VD: In a certain respect, they really are fascists, but in the Italian Fascist sense.

DH: Yeah. I think most of these so-called “far right” parties are on the left by any normal definition. It’s a brilliant media trick in Europe to always refer to them as “the far right”. The target of that is the mainstream right. Every time you read about the BNP in the press, it’s always prefaced with “the far right BNP”, as though they were like us, but more so, which is the opposite of the case. When somebody reads that, it doesn’t make them think any worse of the BNP, it makes them think worse of the right. Which, of course, is why they do it.

Communism and fascism/National Socialism are both "progressive" left wing ideologies. National Socialism may be to the right of communism but it is still a left-wing socialist ideology.

Misconstruing Mussolini
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
Hitler, Mussolini, Roosevelt

British Fascists To the Left

More on the BNP’s success at stealing labor votes. Here are some wonderful posts about the BNP by Daniel Hannan. For instance:

Incidentally, any BBC presenters reading this, why do you keep calling the party “far Right”? Weren’t you listening to Nick Griffin’s acceptance speech? He wasn’t going to talk about immigration policy he said, since everyone knew where he stood on the subject. No, his priority was to expose the way in which public assets had been privatised. Look at the BNP’s manifesto: it wants nationalisation, subsidy, higher taxes, protectionism and (sotto voce) the abolition of the monarchy. And look at where its votes came from. The BNP is a symptom of Labour’s collapse.

Plus readers might remember his interview with Vox Day:

VD:One thing that tends to confuse Americans is that the British National Party is not very popular despite holding what appear to be populist views on immigration and the European Union. Why do they enjoy so little support compared to the three major parties?

DH:Because they are, contrary to the way they are described in the BBC, a party of the far left. They’re in favor of nationalization, they’re in favor of protectionism, they want workers’ councils to run industry, they want a massive state program of rebuilding manufacture. Like Hayek said about the socialist roots of Nazism, they are a national socialist party and the socialist bit is very important to them. Plus, there is a line, a very important line in politics, between being anti-immigration and anti-immigrant. And they’ve crossed that line.

VD: In a certain respect, they really are fascists, but in the Italian Fascist sense.

DH: Yeah. I think most of these so-called “far right” parties are on the left by any normal definition. It’s a brilliant media trick in Europe to always refer to them as “the far right”. The target of that is the mainstream right. Every time you read about the BNP in the press, it’s always prefaced with “the far right BNP”, as though they were like us, but more so, which is the opposite of the case. When somebody reads that, it doesn’t make them think any worse of the BNP, it makes them think worse of the right. Which, of course, is why they do it.

.

There is plenty more.

I'd like to see you link to something from say, Mike Cernovich.

You mean the guy who thinks his cum has magical properties? (No, I'm not joking about that. Well, yeah, I'm joking about it, but it's actually true. Cernovich thinks his pecker-snot is magical.)

Here, I'll gladly link to something from Mike "Juicebro" Cernovich and his patented "Gorilla Mindset" and patented "nootropics".

https://wonkette.com/612835/a-...

And just so you don't think I just picked a left-wing blog in order to show what Mike "Juicebro" Cernovich is about, here's a little something-something about him from the National Review:

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

The reason you won't see anything from Mike Cernovich linked here is because he is a goddamned laughing stock.

It is not proven, but it is perfectly plausible — does not contradict anything we already know. We know, the Democratic Party has local operatives in major cities — certainly those, where the local government is Democrat-dominated — who are ready, indeed enthusiastic about inciting riots and commit other crimes to "win this motherfucker".

Why is it such an outrageous stretch to suspect, there are a few people, who are willing to commit actual murder — or pay a cynical someone for same — for the Greater Good(TM)? And we do know, that killing President would be considered Ok — what's so unbelievable about it seeming Ok to kill a lowly DNC-staffer, if he is deemed a traitor to the Progressive cause?

We also know, the very "heroine" of this story is afraid of being "disappeared" — despite being in government's custody. Is it because she would've approved of such "disappearance" of her political opponents? And if she can be afraid of being killed by government employees, why is it so unbelievable, that a Party's operative could kill someone on a street in bad neighborhood — political assassination masked as a botched robbery?

Quite coherent...

Robert Trivers' original papers, or any decent rehash thereof.

Trivers proposed the theories of reciprocal altruism (1971), parental investment (1972), facultative sex ratio determination (1973), and parent–offspring conflict (1974).

He has also contributed by explaining self-deception as an adaptive evolutionary strategy (first described in 1976) and discussing intragenomic conflict.

I really didn't know Trivers' work until edge.org starting featuring these ideas in the early 2000s.

Instead I slogged through my teenage years reading Roots (icch), Airport (icch), Mere Christianity (icch), Your Erroneous Zones (icch), The Arms of Krupp (painful, but worth the effort), and The Sovereign State (of ITT) (even more painful, but also worth the effort).

I was a sampler of all things.

As such, it looks like I managed to read nearly every non-fiction work mentioned on this young thread either A) by the age of 23, B) shortly after first publication.

The one exception being Ayn Rand, a permanent no-fly zone.

Big Sister Is Watching You — 1957

Since a great many of us dislike much that Miss Rand dislikes, quite as heartily as she does, many incline to take her at her word. It is the more persuasive, in some quarters, because the author deals wholly in the blackest blacks and the whitest whites. In this fiction everything, everybody, is either all good or all bad, without any of those intermediate shades which, in life, complicate reality and perplex the eye that seeks to probe it truly. This kind of simplifying pattern, of course, gives charm to most primitive story known as: The War between the Children of Light and the Children of Darkness. In modern dress, it is a class war. Both sides to it are caricatures.

My second vote goes to Wikipedia. Yes, I mean this seriously.

Since elementary school, I was no stranger to the Encyclopedia Britannica, its many gaps forming the permanent, eroding skyline of my bedroom bookshelves. Every month or so, I'd have 20 gaps and 3 volumes standing, so I'd gather them up off every available surface, shelve them in order, and start again.

Then a miracle happened in 2005.

For the last decade, I've been randomly looking things up in Wikipedia, that I would have liked to have looked up long before, only it wasn't immediate, organized, and convenient.

Just yesterday I started randomly looking up all the cartoons I grew up with, and a few more recent ones:

* xkcd — 2005
* Calvin and Hobbes — 1995
* Dilbert — 1989
* Bloom County — 1980
* The Far Side — 1980
* Doonesbury — 1970
* The Family Circus — 1960
* B.C. (comic strip) — 1958
* Dennis the Menace (U.S. comics) — 1951
* Peanuts — 1950
* Blondie (comic strip) — 1930

Doesn't that shine a different light on ye olde Dagwood sandwich?

According to Blondie scripter Dean Young, his father, Chic Young, began drawing the huge sandwiches in the comic strip during 1936.

Where else would one go to systematically back-fill these (perhaps) inconsequential gaps?

Exactly.

If you look over the list 2,478 Islam-inspired attacks in 2016, which killed 21,237 humans -- TheReligionOfPeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=2016 -- you'll see that most of the victims were Muslim themselves.

There's nothing wrong with a containment strategy that keeps this problem from spreading to non-Muslim countries.

For example, if Seddique Mateen, the Taliban-supporting father of the Orlando shooter, had never been permitted to travel to the U.S., 49 additional Americans would be alive today.

They left their tents and gear behind (and yes some trash)

That is totally wrong. They left over 200 cars, with all of the leaking fluids you'd expect from cars too worn to take away. They did not leave "some trash", they left 48 million pounds of trash. That is not a typo, that is from the The North Dakota Department of Emergency Services who hand to pay for carting that off (over $1 million taxpayers had to pay).

But frankly what I thought was even worse (even though destroying hundreds of acres of grass and deeply polluting the watershed was bad enough), they also abandoned dogs - remember this was in winter, in sub-zero temperatures. That is the kind of SCUM you are supporting. Between fields of leaking cars and abandoned animals (may of which died BTW), How can you claim those are environmentalists of any form?

At the time I left a large donation to the local animal shelter that had to handle the nonsense, you may want to consider doing the same as an act on contrition.

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

no, just #blacklivesmatter 100 times.

because fuck standards.

Examples? No problem.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/r...

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

http://reason.org/blog/show/tw...

The EPA has a terrible track record with the SCOTUS, repeatedly getting slapped down often with scathing words about their nonsense.

The US uses the World Health Organization (WHO) definition, unlike Germany and most of Western Europe, which use a less strict definition. Most other countries discount births that are not viable because they're too underweight or too early, while the US (for once) follows international guidelines. This means the US over-represents infant mortality and many other countries, including Cuba, under-represent it.

Castro did indeed create an amazing medical system for a third world nation and their education system isnt so bad.

Stop
spreading
this
myth.
Just stop.

Just use Google ffs.

Wait, did you just discriminate against women without vaginas? You bigot!

It's not academic. Women without vaginas outnumber women with vaginas in programming companies, yet we still talk about the "mother's room" as a women's issue. somehow the infighting has not touched that yet, thank god.

Wait, did you just discriminate against women without vaginas? You bigot!

I fully agree. Construction defects are however much less important than Russia selling weapons to Iran. They need to prevent terrorism-supporting countries getting weapons, not construction defects.

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

ps. you are a complete fucking retard of some kind - right?

You can see here for the argument I was going to make.

President Obama, too, was ambivalent about retaining even a small force in Iraq. For several months, American officials told me, they were unable to answer basic questions in meetings with Iraqis—like how many troops they wanted to leave behind—because the Administration had not decided. “We got no guidance from the White House,” Jeffrey told me. “We didn’t know where the President was. Maliki kept saying, ‘I don’t know what I have to sell.’ ”

Here's a polemic on the same topic. Internal government staffers have said the same thing: Obama didn't need to leave, he could have left troops in Iraq if he had wanted to.

There is an argument to be made that he failed to make a deal to leave troops because of incompetence, but it's more likely Obama got exactly what he wanted.

Well, for starters, I am a thermal engineer with over 20 years of experience. As far as a climate scientist, try John Coleman, he has about 60 years of experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

If you have a truly open mind, you might want to read this article on the majority farce: http://www.nationalreview.com/...

If you really want some hard science, from first a first principles perspective, the temperature of the planet is driven by the energy received from the sun plus the energy released on the planet (fossil fuels/nuclear/etc.) minus the energy stored by the planet (plant and animal biomass changes) minus the energy radiated out to space. The earth radiates heat to space which is essentially at absolute zero with essentially a 100% view factor (black body radiation). The incident energy from the sun is more or less constant over time (1100 W/m^2). The big concern is changing the emissivity of the atmosphere or surface which affects the equation Qdot=(emissivity)*(Stephan-Boltzman constant)*Area*(Tabs^4). The area of the planet and Stephan-Boltzman constant are essential unchanged. Note that if the atmosphere changes the emissivity of the planet by 20%, the energy radiated is changed by 20%. However, if the global temperature increases by 1C, the amount of energy released increases by 95,054,975 times (assuming a global average temperature of 14C or 287K: 288K^4-287K^4). So on the one hand we have a theoretical, potential emissivity change of around 0.2 and the "climate scientists" are acting like chicken little, but on the other hand, if the global temperature goes up a SINGLE DEGREE the radiated energy goes up 95,054,975 times. In my book, 0.295,054,975 ( means massively smaller) and therefore AGW is highly unlikely and the planet changing temperature as we know it always has based on a multitude of factors for the most part unrelated to human activities.

BTW, CO2 already completely blocks IR radiation in the 3 bands that it absorbs and therefore adding more CO2 to the atmosphere will not change the emissivity of the atmosphere. A cloudy day can block 60% of the incoming solar energy and a cloudy night can change the emissivity of the planet by 75%

The first big day for this movement was Tax Day, April 15. And organizers had a gimmick. They asked people to send a tea bag to the Oval Office. One of the exhortations was “Tea Bag the Fools in D.C.” A protester was spotted with a sign saying, “Tea Bag the Liberal Dems Before They Tea Bag You.” So, conservatives started it: started with this terminology. But others ran with it and ran with it.

So... fuck your teabagger party, If you're too fucking stupid to remember anything, you're nothing more than a useless dipshit. They weren't in opposition to "crazy people" exercising power... they were in response to a black guy getting elected, and having more intelligence in his toenail clippings than their entire inbred family.

And by the way, fascist dipshit... i'm just trying not to be too "PC" for whiny little shitstains like you... because you've said so many times you hate having to be PC. So...fuck you. Either learn what you're talking about, or just stay down on your fascist teabagger knees.

In June, the Obama Justice Department submitted an application that apparently “named” Trump in addition to some of his associates. As I have stressed, it is unclear whether “named” in this context indicates that Trump himself was cited as a person the Justice Department was alleging was a Russian agent whom it wanted to surveil. It could instead mean that Trump’s name was merely mentioned in an application that sought to conduct surveillance on other alleged Russian agents. President Trump’s tweets on Saturday claimed that “President Obama . . . tapp[ed] my phones[,]” which makes it more likely that Trump was targeted for surveillance, rather than merely mentioned in the application. In any event, the FISA court reportedly turned down the Obama Justice Department’s request, which is notable: The FISA court is notoriously solicitous of government requests to conduct national-security surveillance (although, as I’ve noted over the years, the claim by many that it is a rubber-stamp is overblown). Not taking no for an answer, the Obama Justice Department evidently returned to the FISA court in October 2016, the critical final weeks of the presidential campaign. This time, the Justice Department submitted a narrowly tailored application that did not mention Trump. The court apparently granted it, authorizing surveillance of some Trump associates. It is unknown whether that surveillance is still underway, but the New York Times has identified – again, based on illegal leaks of classified information – at least three of its targets: Paul Manafort (the former Trump campaign chairman who was ousted in August), and two others whose connection to the Trump campaign was loose at best, Manafort’s former political-consulting business partner Roger Stone, and investor Carter Page. The Times report (from mid-January) includes a lot of heavy breathing about potential ties between the Trump campaign and Russia; but it ultimately concedes that the government’s FISA investigation may have nothing to do with Trump, the campaign, or alleged Russian efforts to interfere in the U.S. election by hacking e-mail accounts. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/...

Funny how, when the CBO contained a clause you could spin as a bad thing - republicans loved it, now they pretend it's meaningless because it's dissing trumpkill.

The CBO is an adversarial source. You can only take seriously the things that they admit which harm their side - the congresscritters who requested the CBO study and placed the operating assumptions that the CBO is required to operate under..

And yet EVERY SINGLE ONE of those corruption cases I cited happened in a state with a private prison to pay the bribes. In fact you're just plain wrong - a public prison has every incentive to make their fixed budget stretch as far as possible, that means as few people inside as possible.

Ok, I looked through every post you made in this discussion. What was the number of corruption cases you cited? ZERO. It's very easy for EVERY SINGLE ONE of your ZERO cited cases to be whatever you want them to be. But even if you had cited a few cases, it's still trivial to cherry pick.

Corruption goes beyond your, ehem, limited selection. For example, we have this public jail example of corruption (and more, here) from New York City. And some of the supposed private corporation bribery was actually done by prison guard labor unions.

The growth of Californiaâ(TM)s incarceration system, and the decline of its quality, tracks the accession to power of the stateâ(TM)s prison guards union, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association (âoeCCPOAâ). The CCPOA has played a significant role in advocating pro-incarceration policies and opposing pro-rehabilitative policies in California. In 1980, CCPOAâ(TM)s 5,600 members earned about $21,000 a year and paid dues of about $35 a month. After the rapid expansion of the prison population beginning in the 1980s, CCPOAâ(TM)s 33,000 members today earn approximately $73,000 and pay monthly dues of about $80. These dues raise approximately $23 million each year, of which the CCPOA allocates approximately $8 million to lobbying. As Ms. Petersilia explains, âoeThe formula is simple: more prisoners lead to more prisons; more prisons require more guards; more guards means more dues-paying members and fund-raising capability; and fund-raising, of course, translates into political influence.â

And you simply don't understand the conflicts of interest that face jails private or public. They only get funded, if there is a need for the jail and the funding tends to be proportional to the number of prisoners either way.

Is there really a problem with News people telling you that their In-Laws are from Albebaran? Other than the Pizzagate story and the constant stream of lies from the Lunatic-in-Chief, what blatant whole-cloth falsehoods have been put out there?

Shit like this seems a lot more pervasive to me (and if it's caught the retraction ends up on page 13 in the personals) - http://www.nationalreview.com/...

LOL, Try not to project so much. Statistically, conservative right wingers (classical centrists who are for limited government and as much personal freedom as is reasonable) are the working middle class.

The liberal progressive Democrats are 25X times more likely to be unemployed (or maybe that's unemployable) and 7X more likely to be a criminal.

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

(If you can get past the spin at politifact, you can find the actual statistics there on criminals registering to vote.)
http://www.politifact.com/trut...

Bannon was just recorded on audio the other day at some meeting. The topic was Trump's clear mandate to disassemble the administrative state and gut non-statute regulations. That's the plan. They want to make sure if something's not in the statutory code it's not legally enforceable. The want to completely dismantle the Executive agencies beyond Defense, State, and DHS basically.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/...

Pai's not there to provide regulations or play games with regulations. He's there to remove them. "Improved demarcation" means in this context he wants to shrink what each one covers to the point there's obviously no overlap.