Slashdot Mirror

This morning on Morning Edition NPR broadcast a talk with Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg. (Probably because Sandberg has a new book out on the subject.) I thought it was quite interesting.

On the other hand this book also got Gloria Allred on the warpath to bash the book. Ms Allred's claim is that 'Lean In' (the title of Ms Sandberg's book) is a thinly veiled attempt to blame women for their own predicament. The basic premise of the book (I haven't read it yet), appears to be that women are not self-confident enough and that career choices for women are often about compromise, some of which are compromises that male colleagues do not have to make.

Instead, Ms Allred (in numerous radio interviews) appears to claim that the proper role of women who achieve in the workplace should be to encourage the enlistment of collective bargining (e.g., unions), to eliminate compromises and to help all women to achieve rather than to promote more self-confidence among women (since women are chided for being self-confident in the work place) and allow women make any career/family choices since they should be able to have it all.

An interesting spin on Ms Sandberg's book. One wonders if she meant that women should be submitting themselves to the male-dominated union power structure rather than promote their own accomplishments individually? I'm not sure if that's exactly how that's supposed to work out... Anyhoo... To each their own politics...

If he expressed an opinion on that, he would end up being constantly attacked on it

Great, we could finally have a national conversation on a serious issue that's been hurting the country for decades. That's a good thing.

Doubly good for Obama is that all the attacks Republicans would throw at him are easily deflected with actual facts. There are no honest, well meaning arguments for Cannabis prohibition, so Republicans would have to throw dishonest, malicious arguments at him, making them look even worse.

Realistically, if you want to change policy, you have to change public opinion: like it or not,

And what would have happened if the President had said that he was at least in principle in favor of reform? If it's anything like gay marriage, popular opinion would swing in favor of reform.

Cannabis reform isn't happening because it's not popular.

Cannabis reform is favored by at least half of the country according to polls. If our system was anywhere close to being fair, then roughly half of our politicians would be in favor of Cannabis reform. But we can't even get them to admit that this is a serious issue.

In reality, you have the causation reversed. Politicans refuse to treat the issue seriously, which marginalizes those of us who see it as a serious issue.

This morning on Morning Edition NPR broadcast a talk with Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg. (Probably because Sandberg has a new book out on the subject.) I thought it was quite interesting.

Neither side has the balls to do anything unpopular unless their is a crisis driving them.

Or in this case, a fake crisis.

Nobody has ever, ever, ever articulated what is supposed to happen if "we don't get his durn debt under control."

However, when we pay off our debt, depressions happen.

Dude, this isn't Hollywood. Even at the incredible speed at which global warming is occuring, we're still talking about something that's happening at a speed unlikely to significantly change the environment you're living in within your lifetime. When I say significant, I mean "I lived in a lush forest when I was born, and now it's an apocalyptic desert where no rain falls."

What about "When I was born everyone ate beef for every meal but as I got older the cost of meat made it a once a week thing"? No true patriot is going to care about water wars and death in Africa. You're better off to let supply and demand (no subsidies!) ruin America's constant burger consumption. Then they'll finally cry foul. Look at Texas, they aren't just losing cattle. Trees, money, water, wildlife ... not quite "apocalyptic" desert yet ...

Dude, this isn't Hollywood. Even at the incredible speed at which global warming is occuring, we're still talking about something that's happening at a speed unlikely to significantly change the environment you're living in within your lifetime. When I say significant, I mean "I lived in a lush forest when I was born, and now it's an apocalyptic desert where no rain falls."

What about "When I was born everyone ate beef for every meal but as I got older the cost of meat made it a once a week thing"? No true patriot is going to care about water wars and death in Africa. You're better off to let supply and demand (no subsidies!) ruin America's constant burger consumption. Then they'll finally cry foul. Look at Texas, they aren't just losing cattle. Trees, money, water, wildlife ... not quite "apocalyptic" desert yet ...

How long before North Korea decides to do a space-based EMP burst to take out the IT industry on the Pacific coast? Ever hear of Starfish Prime? It doesn't have to be able to reach the US - 1000 miles away is sufficient (~4200 miles). It's 4700miles for Syria -> Washington.

Good thing the missiles we know about are limited to 800 miles which means a land-based launch on DC would have to come from Bermuda. DC is 1200 miles from Havana, but 750 miles from Atlanta. I'd be securing the Caribbean and Atlantic as well as the exercises around Korea. Mexico is ill-equipped to prevent illegal arms transport while fighting a drug war.

Who's to say they're not already working with Syria on an ICBM with a 5000 mile range? On the other hand, why announce it if you're going to do a pre-emptive strike? That just removed the element of surprise.

This kind of thing happens whenever you have an opinionated celebrity with controversial views that are at odds with a lot of their fan base.

Erm... no. No it doesn't. It "happens" when celebs fail to be politically correct. When a celeb with a cohort of degenerates says something politically correct it is celebrated and rewarded. No media drama. No discussion about precisely how far we need to bury the reprobate.

The phenomena is not symmetric. There are social check valves through which we stratify each other. Those valves are arranged by wealthy, urban multi-culties and their many well trained aspirants.

Some. Sanctions ousted the Haitian military government in 1994, at the cost of destroying the Haitian economy. Here, NPR did a podcast on sanctions:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/01/17/145361054/the-tuesday-podcast-do-sanctions-work

The short is that sanctions work about as often as they fail but often have very negative side effects. Many fewer domestic repercussions with imposing sanctions than with sending in the military though.

Sure, if your food is grown in magic land

He's an urban forager that sources his food from the neighborhood while biking and eats it raw.

No processing, cooking, transportation or cleanup.

Sure, if your food is grown in magic land

He's an urban forager that sources his food from the neighborhood while biking and eats it raw.

No processing, cooking, transportation or cleanup.

What a obviously stupid thing to say. The U.S. exported over $2 trillion worth of goods and services last year.

So if you took a 5% pay cut you would pay 5% less of everything? Call up your bank and tell them you'll only pay 95% of your mortgage? Would you pay only 95% of your internet and phone bills? Would you go the gas pump and only fill up your tank 95% of the way? Would you only pay 95% of your health, home, and auto insurance?

The fact of the matter is that all departments have fixed and variable expenses. They can't touch the fixed expenses (including contracts already awarded) so brunt of the cuts occur on the variable expenses as big or as small as they are.

So if 80% of your budget is unalterable then the remaining 20% of the budget will bear the whole of the 5% cut (or a 25% cut to those expenses).

This is why training (as an example) would be cut 75% and govt employee hours would be cut 20% for a limited number of weeks in the year.

Rash changes and cuts cause all sorts of boneheaded decisions, like taking out hugely expensive bonds or selling off govt assets and services to private companies only to have the sold back to the govt' at a higher cost (all for a short term boost).

This letter says it all and to date the Administration, specifically the TSA has not addressed the concerns raised. The TSA unilaterally has conducted a large science experiment on the traveling public without the smallest amount of scientific scrutiny on the safety of the procedure. This again flies in the face of a "transparent administration" as promised by Obama.

My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.

These systems were rushed into use without any concern for safety of the operators and the people being scanned. Obviously the operators who are around these systems day in and day out are at the greatest risk but also the passengers, some like me who fly very frequently. I don't like going through the humiliation of the pat down but that's far better than getting another case of skin cancer.

It doesn't matter who is voted into office, what matters is who is willing to pay for the campaign. It takes money to run for Congress and these creatures are acting no differently than their predecessors or successors.

It takes a small number of people with a strong vested interest to fund a campaign when the opposition is not willing to fund an counter campaign. To wit

Judy Chu, a Democrat, has raised $80,000 from people, pacs and companies associated with the movie industry.

Howard Coble, a Republican, has raised $40,000 from the same sources.

$120,000 tells you why these people are doing this. Slashdot isn't raising $120,000 against the legislation so it goes forward..

This snippet sums it all up, "I've put in two calls to your PAC director, and I haven't received any return phone calls," the Congressman said, according to Williams. "Now why am I taking this meeting?" The minute he left the office, Williams called his PAC director, and she cut those checks. "

I remember reading this article a while back showing how congress was forcing the military to buy equipment they didn't even want.

Lets get real here. The military could cut a ton of funds and it would have zero effect on readiness. If the military actually had control of some of these decisions instead of stupid politicians. There is a ton of equipment that the military would skip buying, or buy cheaper versions if the government would stop running the DoD as a corporate welfare program. There are lots of bases that can and should be closed and consolidated, but can't for political reasons.

The problem is not that the military is going to lose funding, it that the pork that congress pushes through the DoD in the name of national defence will go under the chopping block.

Ah, well, it seems they're doing that in the mobile market, anyway.

They're actually doing something about this because some smartphone games for children do location tracking, and nobody knows why.

According to the FTC, among its more troubling findings is that many children's apps "shared certain information with third parties -- such as device ID, geolocation, or phone number -- without disclosing that fact to parents. Further, a number of apps contained interactive features -- such as advertising, the ability to make in-app purchases, and links to social media -- without disclosing these features to parents prior to download."

I'm not from the US, but I've seen fox news and npr, and I think you can objectively say that the shit runs deep on fox news. Just because Fox makes shit that is right-wing biased doesn't mean you have to drag npr down there just because they apparently are left-wing biased.

...except for its completely different orbital path, direction of entry into Earth's atmosphere, and timing of the encounter with Earth, all of which definitively prove that it is not related to 2012 DA14.

I've always wondered outloud why all Russians have dashcams. Now I look like a fool.

There was a great piece on this at Krulwich Wonders a couple of months back...

Organic Farmers filed a class-action lawsuit against Monsanto over suing for patent infringement where cross-pollination was the culprit and the judge threw the case out because the farmers could not produce one single example of this happening.

I am not overly familiar with the US court system but how about out of court settlements, could the judge even take those into consideration? http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/23451

Monsanto has sued more than 700 additional farmers who have settled out-of-court rather than face Monsanto's belligerent, and well-financed, litigious actions.

The article you refer to is very vague on the actual specifics in the Organic Farmers' lawsuit and equally vague on the details for the judge's decision. To me it almost read as a press release with just that tiny hint of "balanced" reporting needed to not be overly blatant in for whom it were written.

What was it that they could not produce one single example of happening, cross pollination? If so, your linked article contain a link ( http://www.npr.org/2011/03/01/134162035/a-growing-debate-how-to-define-organic-food ) leading to the below:

Organic farmers aren't allowed to plant GMO seeds. But most conventional corn in America is genetically modified, and among all grains, corn is perhaps the most promiscuous cross-pollinator, so its genes often migrate into organic fields via windblown pollen that lands on the tassels of organic corn..... most organic corn in the U.S. typically contains anywhere from half a percent to 2 percent GMOs, according to companies that sell such corn to organic dairies or poultry farmers. It has been that way since genetically engineered corn and soybeans became popular, more than a decade ago

So cross pollination would appear to be a fact. Leaving us to assume that the judge threw out the case as the Organic Farmers' were unable to prove any cases of Monsanto suing farmers for cases where the claimed infringement were due to cross pollination. How about the below, close enough for you? http://rt.com/usa/news/monsanto-seeds-trial-bowman-123/:

At the center of the case is Monsanto’s protection of its patented soybean, known as Roundup Ready. When farmers like Bowman plant the company’s seeds, they are only allowed to harvest the resulting crop – not keep any for next year’s harvest.

Under these rules, farmers have to buy new Monsanto seeds to plant each season, even if they already have usable seeds in their possession.

However, farmers are able to buy excess soybeans from local grain elevators, many of which are likely to be Roundup Ready seeds. One of Bowman's trips to such a grain elevator put him in Monsanto’s sights.

“We have always had the right to go to an elevator, buy some ‘junk grain’ and use it for seed if you desire,” Bowman explained.

While not a case of cross pollination in the strict meaning of the word it do get pretty damned close, if a ruling is made in favor of Monsanto it would invite them to get even more aggressive in their intimidation tactics and I would be little surprised if the number of out of court settlements increased exponentially.

Organic Farmers filed a class-action lawsuit against Monsanto over suing for patent infringement where cross-pollination was the culprit and the judge threw the case out because the farmers could not produce one single example of this happening.

I am not overly familiar with the US court system but how about out of court settlements, could the judge even take those into consideration? http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/23451

Monsanto has sued more than 700 additional farmers who have settled out-of-court rather than face Monsanto's belligerent, and well-financed, litigious actions.

The article you refer to is very vague on the actual specifics in the Organic Farmers' lawsuit and equally vague on the details for the judge's decision. To me it almost read as a press release with just that tiny hint of "balanced" reporting needed to not be overly blatant in for whom it were written.

What was it that they could not produce one single example of happening, cross pollination? If so, your linked article contain a link ( http://www.npr.org/2011/03/01/134162035/a-growing-debate-how-to-define-organic-food ) leading to the below:

Organic farmers aren't allowed to plant GMO seeds. But most conventional corn in America is genetically modified, and among all grains, corn is perhaps the most promiscuous cross-pollinator, so its genes often migrate into organic fields via windblown pollen that lands on the tassels of organic corn..... most organic corn in the U.S. typically contains anywhere from half a percent to 2 percent GMOs, according to companies that sell such corn to organic dairies or poultry farmers. It has been that way since genetically engineered corn and soybeans became popular, more than a decade ago

So cross pollination would appear to be a fact. Leaving us to assume that the judge threw out the case as the Organic Farmers' were unable to prove any cases of Monsanto suing farmers for cases where the claimed infringement were due to cross pollination. How about the below, close enough for you? http://rt.com/usa/news/monsanto-seeds-trial-bowman-123/:

At the center of the case is Monsanto’s protection of its patented soybean, known as Roundup Ready. When farmers like Bowman plant the company’s seeds, they are only allowed to harvest the resulting crop – not keep any for next year’s harvest.

Under these rules, farmers have to buy new Monsanto seeds to plant each season, even if they already have usable seeds in their possession.

However, farmers are able to buy excess soybeans from local grain elevators, many of which are likely to be Roundup Ready seeds. One of Bowman's trips to such a grain elevator put him in Monsanto’s sights.

“We have always had the right to go to an elevator, buy some ‘junk grain’ and use it for seed if you desire,” Bowman explained.

While not a case of cross pollination in the strict meaning of the word it do get pretty damned close, if a ruling is made in favor of Monsanto it would invite them to get even more aggressive in their intimidation tactics and I would be little surprised if the number of out of court settlements increased exponentially.

I'm not a Monsanto fan at all, and was shocked at the corrupt behaviors described in the film Food Inc about the company suing small farms out of business because their crops were inadvertently cross-pollinated with Monsanto RoudupReady GMOs, but then I felt like a fool because Organic Farmers filed a class-action lawsuit against Monsanto over suing for patent infringement where cross-pollination was the culprit and the judge threw the case out because the farmers could not produce one single example of this happening.

Better story at npr, please stop linking to RT.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/10/15/162949288/farmer-tackling-monsantos-seed-policy-gets-a-day-in-supreme-court

'He also took advantage of the gene. It allowed him to spray Roundup (or a generic version of the same weedkiller), which made controlling weeds relatively cheap and easy.'

If you are buying leftover seed and harvested seed it's one thing. If you spray it with Roundup, you are using it as Roundup-ready seed and you are thus utilizing the value of Monsanto's invention. Why should you not pay for the enhanced features of Monsanto's seed if you use them?

If you don't use them, the Monsanto doesn't sue. So you can buy and harvest seed, just use it as regular seed, not Roundup-ready seed.

But here is what is gonna make capitalists shit their pants, libertarians too.....capitalism, like every other ism, is doomed and MUST be destroyed, there is no other choice. Technology has already made most blue collar and now many white collar jobs disappear, after all nobody hires humans to calculate anything, the machines do it. Don't need humans in the factories, only a couple to push buttons as the machines work. Seen the Hondabot? Climbs stairs, can work in hazardous areas, never gets tired, never needs a break, don't need healthcare or sick leave, not ever

This straw man is being trotted out way too often these days. Automation isn't producing any less jobs. Job fields come and go all the time. Here's a whole slew of them that have been obsoleted to date: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124251060
And there's just as many new jobs that didn't exist decades ago, such as the fast growing field of cybersecurity.

Heck, the US practically eliminated all its manufacturing jobs and became a service economy. Markets ebb and flow, but work will always be there. I don't know why you can't see this, why you're focused only on the "jobs being lost to automation" side of the equation while ignoring all the variables on the other end (innovations, industry demand shifts, population decline, new markets such as outer space for future high-tech ventures). If you're really going to project decades down the road, at least be fair about it. Until the Singularity comes, there will always be jobs for humans. If anything, menial jobs will be eliminated and the intellectual barrier for entry into the work force will be elevated, requiring better education across the board (and that's a good thing).

He is retiring for health reasons. His radiologist found a gorilla on his x-ray.

First: To label any government monopoly as "non-profit" is misleading; it only means that they aren't incorporated, really, and have no investors to grovel to. Most government-run monopolies are behemoths that only passably serve customers if all profits are channeled into large parasitic private interests - most of which wouldn't exist if the government hadn't bloated them to gross extremes. Example: the military-industrial complex, the pharmaceutical industry, education, agriculture, energy, telecommunications, etc. etc.

Second: you seem to largely believe that I'm a "Bug". Let me clear the record: I'm not a gold bug. Tying any currency to a single commodity is disastrous, and the reason for a lot of our problems in the late 19th century. The silver act I was talking about? It put us on a de facto gold standard, and that is what ruined us. Multiple commodities - and I mean 50+ strong, stable commodities (think energy, or agricultural staples, or heavy metals - or all of the above) - would tie currency into the very web that it is supposed to represent, preventing shocks and fluctuations without apocalyptic economic conditions (in which case, we'd all have bigger problems to worry about anyway).

Third: I'd like to dispel some misconceptions: Glass-Steagall wasn't completely repealed, and those parts of it that were had absolutely nothing to do with the financial crisis.

Hoarding does one thing: it allows prices to rise. This only becomes a problem when suddenly someone is dumping things back into the market. However, this isn't a problem if you have a currency based on multiple, stable commodities. Hoarding would only cause a rise in a particular market (and a loss to the hoarders), while providing an advantage to competitors that use the rise of demand to elbow into the market. Hoarding doesn't make sense to any businessman. Anywhere.

Debt-to-asset ratios are nothing to the Fed. The expansion of their books? That's like writing a ton of zeroes at the end of their listed bonds, and for some reason they don't think this will create wild changes when those bonds spread around... sigh...

Systems only wipe out everyone in interdependent webs of finance. If you have your own backed currency with controls based on contracts with private interests, your currency is essentially tied to its own micro-economy, and truly earth-shattering effects would have to be felt across the board in order to shake it.

I heard about a project where Virtual Reality was used to help burn patients suffer less. They participate in a VR world called SnowWorld Link http://www.hitl.washington.edu/projects/vrpain/ and a report about it http://www.npr.org/2012/02/12/146775049/virtual-penguins-a-prescription-for-pain

The reduction in pain for the patients was significant and consistent. I had first heard of this when NPR was talking about soldiers returning from Iraq and how this helped them deal with pain. It's amazing what this kind of technology can do to help people, particularly those who have been injured. I am sure that VR will be able to help those who suffer from PTSD and who knows what else. The SnowWorld stuff is quite fascinating and worth a read. Do a Google search and you'll find plenty of information on it.

I'm thinking it should be, "Federal IT Capabilities Limit Ability for Federal Gun Control." And that isn't a bad thing.

"Universal Background Checks" sounds all nice and good right up to the moment that you realize any such system would require a database of every known felon, every person found incompetent mentally, for just a negative-control system. (As opposed to a positive system confirming an SSN or Driver's License belongs to that person.)

The Government has such a great record with massive databases:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-02-05-immigration_N.htm

http://www.npr.org/2012/08/16/158932528/states-arent-submitting-records-to-gun-database

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57432795/family-of-no-fly-list-toddler-wants-apology/

They've done so well, after all, I'm sure this will be no trouble for them.

Kill switch, yes, but it will beg you not to kill it: http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/01/28/170272582/do-we-treat-our-gadgets-like-they-re-human

Free NPR interview with the reporter: http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=170727524&m=170727501

The hardware is Bay Bridge. The Chinese knockoff will be available around Labor Day 2013.

They don't print money anymore, they just press a button on a computer: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/08/26/129451895/how-to-spend-1-25-trillion

'The Fed was able to spend so much money so quickly because it has a unique power: It can create money out of thin air, whenever it decides to do so. So, Dzina explains, the mortgage team would decide to buy a bond, they’d push a button on the computer — "and voila, money is created."'

See the "choice" of the US to subsidize cotton growers in Brazil due to the WTO and Brazillian influence upon US Coorporations. This is one of those things that the typical media does not like to cover but NPR did. It is also one of those things, that once you hear about, you don't forget. So you are sort of correct: we do not care at all about what the WTO thinks until we are persuaded otherwise.

brontosaurus

http://www.npr.org/2012/12/09/166665795/forget-extinct-the-brontosaurus-never-even-existed

Nuke them!

Apparently Russia nuked out of control oil and gas wells and suggested the same for the Deepwater Horizon spill (nuking the gulf of mexico couldn't possibly have gone wrong, could it?) and we have all these nuclear weapons that no-one really wants to use lying about...

As a bonus, the lava should mean that the radioactives are less of a problem. Or you'll now have radioactive eruptions of lava which is sure to lead to superheroes, right?

Here, , and here.

Your citations will be appreciated as well. As for point 2, it is important to distinguish between those who go through the motions and those who truly believe someone is watching. It's also worth considering that the observations I noted may hold in cases where the threshold is something other than crime/not crime. Various rationalizations and sophistry might also be involved, particularly where the requirement of deep sincerity (and perhaps penance) to receive forgiveness and absolution through prayer has not been emphasized. Perhaps that is more important in the case of the adult mind.

On point 3, note that I do not claim that atheists cannot be ethical or moral. I am quite certain that it is possible. As for the relative likelihood of ethical behavior, it is worth considering that in a society where theism is the default, people who think more deeply about things will be over-represented amongst atheists and that such reflection likely has bearing on ethical behavior. The results might be much less pretty if atheism was the default.

As for your conclusion, Princess Alice seems to disagree :-)

... when they build in a flood plane but don't want to bother to buy flood insurance. After all, they needed to money that they could have spent on flood insurance to pay for their fancy smart phone to run the app...

That's a very cynical view; insurance policies are much trickier than that. For example, the "anti-concurrent causation clause", which states that "if you have two events happen at the same time, one that is covered and the other that is not covered by the policy, the insurance company doesn't have to pay for either. So if your house has damage from wind, which is covered by your policy, and it also has damage from a flood, which is not covered, the insurance company doesn't have to pay for either the wind or flood damage." Taken from here

So you can have full flood insurance, but if your property received damage due to something else, you'll still be screwed. If you're in say, a hurricane, odds are you'll be getting more than just flooding. Try having a little compassion for your fellow man, although with sentiment like

... at least we will not be pestered by the truly needy

I suppose that might be asking for too much

How much of this is from the sand storms? I do remember reading how sand storms were a problem but I am not sure if they affect Beijing! I believe this is some pathetic attempt by the U.S to smear China, if indeed --part--of what your seeing is sand dust. You think this is bad here is what they are dealing with in Italy------ http://www.npr.org/2012/12/27/167964697/a-showdown-in-italy-over-a-polluting-steel-plant

NPR has an article about this as well, apparently it's affecting more than 30 cities in China

You're right, more gun laws would just turn America into a police state.

28 per day is complete bullshit, try 120 in the last decade.

Our government killed far more innocent children. Through the illegal trade of guns.

Quoth another AC.

There are rules for "us" where the government is allowed to do what it wants, when it wants to us without us being allowed to question. There is no limit because we now have over 200 dead in Mexico, many being school aged teenagers, along with a border guard because of a gun running program from the ATF. We are not allowed to ask questions because it makes Obama and Holder look bad. The original whistleblowers have been fired from the ATF and no questions to this day have been answered.

Just so you don't think its government officals only. David Gregory [npr.org] knowingly committed a gun related felony on national TV and will not be charged. Because his set of rules are different than they are for you. However, you get pulled over in DC with just the same clip in your car while passing through you WILL be charged.

John Corzine [bloomberg.com] STOLE between $600 Million and $1.2 Trillion from 401k investors where he took their money and bet on EU currencies and lost big time. Thats right, he took money out of 401Ks, gambled with it without their permission, lost big time and declared bankruptcy and the 401Ks are gone. He will not be charged despite this being a textbook case of SOX violations.

Get off your high moral horse of saving everyone else's kids, and start respecting your fellow man. I will not stand for having my liberty, life, freedom, and dignity stripped. I already live above the lawlessness of this forsaken country.

No one deserves to be a slave or a walmart employee. No one deserves to be treated like cattle and expect a sheppered to protect them. We all have a right to our own individual self defense. Many of us need or desire weapons for that.

Guns are used for many things.

The NRA is pushing its own bullshit agenda. Theres many not in the NRA that support fully armed and dangerous people.

I do not fear guns, I fear those who expect others to do their dirty work for them. And live inside white lies.

There are rules for "us" where the government is allowed to do what it wants, when it wants to us without us being allowed to question. There is no limit because we now have over 200 dead in Mexico, many being school aged teenagers, along with a border guard because of a gun running program from the ATF. We are not allowed to ask questions because it makes Obama and Holder look bad. The original whistleblowers have been fired from the ATF and no questions to this day have been answered.

Just so you don't think its government officals only. David Gregory knowingly committed a gun related felony on national TV and will not be charged. Because his set of rules are different than they are for you. However, you get pulled over in DC with just the same clip in your car while passing through you WILL be charged.

John Corzine STOLE between $600 Million and $1.2 Trillion from 401k investors where he took their money and bet on EU currencies and lost big time. Thats right, he took money out of 401Ks, gambled with it without their permission, lost big time and declared bankruptcy and the 401Ks are gone. He will not be charged despite this being a textbook case of SOX violations.

Inert plastic? The same stuff they make carpet, park benches, and food containers out of? The same stuff they ship bottled water in? Reported, regulated, testable plastic. Not trademarked, trade secret potential toxins.

Yes, that same stuff... the same stuff that has been shown to leach into the water you drink! Known, quantifiable toxins!

Still not something I want getting INTO my drinking water, which "ground-up" certainly makes it sound possible that this stuff could filter into aquifers... after all, where does it GO when it leaves the geothermal reservoir it is used to create?

The whole thing seems suspicious, almost like there are vested interests that are going out of their way to justify the sullying of water supplies for the sake of power generation; only this sounds like a sort of greenwashing compared to tracking!

LOL, no I didn't sign that petition and frankly I only sign those things if it's to get something or someone on a ballot. I'm always reminded of Stalin's quote as well regarding the public's right to vote: "“Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything.” You have an excellent example of this the article. Build a death star it means jobs and a technology boost to the US (yada yada yada). Frankly I would have hit delete on it long before it would have became something somebody could vote on but hey, we're "We The People" so let's be inclusive shall we? A retarded answer was what was given to frankly prop up stuff that has jumped the shark.. Sorry, Star Wars is over. Lucas sold out, film at 11..

No, let's see there were thousands of people who decided to sign that supporting Morgan's deportation. My point was that if indeed the White House and Congress gave a rats ass about all of us out here trying to make a living, we'd actually see some movement on one of those petitions. But they're not, they're a whimsical way for people who sign them to think that somebody in DC listens to them, a placebo. Some poor schmuck gets tagged with replying and then it gets edited and then sanitized before it ever gets published. I'd like to see Joe Biden answer one without anybody else proof reading it or editing it before it's put on the website. That's a good idea, maybe I can get a petition going for that one.

but then again...

Guess what, if you have money, lots of money, you can truly be heard in DC and that's the only thing that talks.

Don't believe me?

Moreover, White House officials in a statement said this: The goal of We The People is not to change policy based on reaching a petition threshold, but to create opportunities to organize around issues of common interest; and if successful, get the White House to engage through an official response, including on issues that might not otherwise be the subject of conversation in Washington.

That's from this.. from just a few days ago.

So..

No action, just hopey changey thingy..

Balanced information:

U.S. regulators say Boeing 787 is safe but needs review.

FAA Orders Review Of Boeing 787 Dreamliner quote: "... we are confident about the safety of this aircraft, but we are concerned about these incidents."

A bigger issue: When composite burns it releases poisons. I haven't seen any discussion of Boeing's view of that. Here is a PDF file: Postcrash Health Hazards from Burning Aircraft Composites.

There is NO intent in saying that to imply that a 787 might crash. But if there is a runway or other accident, would passengers be less likely to survive?

The NRA blamed the recent mass murders on, among other things, violent video games.

On the other hand, the NRA went apeshit nuts when police in Tucson wanted to destroy a couple hundred guns.

We know that already. They are about 60% effective.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/01/08/168814935/can-you-get-a-flu-shot-and-still-get-the-flu

First off, RoundUp is the most talked about, but far from the only pesticide used

Second, the whole big thing with pesticide resistant crops is that it allows you to use more of the pesticide on your farm. This is leading to increased pesticides in soil.

Manufacturers have a history of toxic pesticides being used than proven dangerous decades later only to be replaced by new products.

We are now getting reports that manure compost is testing at times with high enough levels of herbicides to post a problem.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-usa-study-pesticides-idUSBRE89100X20121002

http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/10/how-gmos-ramped-us-pesticide-use

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/genetically-modified-crops-pesticides_n_1931020.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/04/pesticides-gmo-monsanto-roundup-resistance_n_1936598.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/08/090817143610.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8308903.stm

http://www.motherearthnews.com/killer-compost-herbicide-contamination-zl0z1211zkin.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate#Human

GMOs infected non GMO products. Yes, we were originally told this wasn't a risk.

The SCIENCE is there...you just want to be ignorant.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129010499

They're still government properties, their frequencies, brands, copyrights and studios belong to the taxpayers, who paid to develop all of it. They'll be on the block soon, just like many municipal water utilities and public power utilities already are. More of the neo-liberal hogwash about how private industry is always more 'efficient' somehow will be used as the justification, or maybe "deficit reduction".

You are dead wrong. According to PBS themselves, they are not and never have been part of any government:

PBS is a private, nonprofit corporation, founded in 1969, whose members are America’s public TV stations -- noncommercial, educational licensees that operate more than 350 PBS member stations and serve all 50 states, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam and American Samoa.

.

NPR is a "privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization."

Both organizations get a significant minority of funding from the Federal government-funded Corporation For Public Broadcasting but neither NPR nor PBS is owned by the Federal government any more than the multitude of private organizations which receive some Federal funding. They probably wouldn't exist today if they hadn't been funded by the CPB and if the CPB stopped funding them altogether, they would suffer greatly. However, no part of the Federal government can sell either PBS or NPR and even if all Federal funding were cut off, they'd still have a chance of surviving on their other sources of funding.