Slashdot Mirror

I did check who owns that site though, turns out it's WebMD. Where does WebMD's advertising come from? The big drug companies. Who hates single payer health care the most? Big drug companies.

SuperKendall has spent his life drinking the kool aid, that won't change. People in the US are bombarded with all sorts of propaganda, and the amazingly profitable health companies are pretty good at it.

I'm also not keen on Insurance companies holding the government to ransom.

Those of us who live in a country where getting ill won't bankrupt you know how good we have it.

The amount of Anonymous Cowards posting the same couple lines makes it obvious. This thread is being astroturfed.

Women are making more money than men for the same job and same amount of work today, especially in cities. Stop reading a bogus 30 year old paper crafted for a narrative and check current reports. or This or This or This and of course This Interestingly most of these are LEFT leaning sites, not Right/Conservative.

PolitiFact has given you the nuts and bolts about the 77 cents statistic -- you can read the two most important works in this area here and here. Basically, there is a wage gap, but it tends to disappear when you compare women and men in the exact same jobs who have the same levels of experience and education. (emphasis mine)

The wage gap gets smaller when you control for job and experience, it doesn't disappear. And it's not certain you should be controlling for those things.

The stat about unmarried women in the 22-30 range earning more is part of it. For one those articles are from 2008-2012 when uneducated males were probably the hardest hit demographic, I'm not sure that stat would be true today.

Also, as they get older that gap is likely to reverse as men move out of apprenticeship positions (in labour or medicine) and as they start moving into management.

Do men get promoted into management because women make different career choices, or because we tend to view men as leaders? The answer to that question affects whether you view the wage gap as legitimate.

Just like 60% of all College students are women, 56% of all College graduates with advanced degrees are women. Yet we continue to hear that we need more women in college.

I'm an egalitarian, not a MRA. I also happen to believe in Socrates' definition of Philosopher, who must seek truth even at their own peril. Sadly the left avoids all truth and distorts everything they can for division and agenda.

More women in College isn't necessarily a sign of equality, women need degrees because uneducated women don't have the same job opportunities as uneducated men in skilled and unskilled labour. I think Iran, hardly an example of gender equality, also has more women in University.

Besides, you're arguing a straw man. The thing you actually year is not "we need more women in college", it's "we need more women in technical fields". There are a lot of well paying fields like software and engineering that women don't pursue, that's also responsible for part of the wage gap. It also leads to the creation of hostile dysfunctional workplaces like the one described in this article.

The amount of Anonymous Cowards posting the same couple lines makes it obvious. This thread is being astroturfed.

Women are making more money than men for the same job and same amount of work today, especially in cities. Stop reading a bogus 30 year old paper crafted for a narrative and check current reports. or This or This or This and of course This Interestingly most of these are LEFT leaning sites, not Right/Conservative.

PolitiFact has given you the nuts and bolts about the 77 cents statistic -- you can read the two most important works in this area here and here. Basically, there is a wage gap, but it tends to disappear when you compare women and men in the exact same jobs who have the same levels of experience and education. (emphasis mine)

Just like 60% of all College students are women, 56% of all College graduates with advanced degrees are women. Yet we continue to hear that we need more women in college.

I'm an egalitarian, not a MRA. I also happen to believe in Socrates' definition of Philosopher, who must seek truth even at their own peril. Sadly the left avoids all truth and distorts everything they can for division and agenda.

Your point is meaningless when everyone's retirement account is invested in the stock market. What goes up must come down. As people found out in 2009, the value of retirement accounts can easily drop 50% in a stock market crash.

Your point is meaningless when you consider the amount of retirement savings the average American has. Translation: Dow Jones matters to you not the majority of Americans. Majority of Americans are primarily concerned with GDP and actual economic opportunity. You're probably well educated in an in demand field. It's not surprising why you would be out of touch with reality. I am also well educated in an in demand field but I actually keep in touch with reality. You should try it some time. At a minimum, it makes you more thankful for what you have.

Nature wrote a solid article on the dangers. IMO it's going to lead to some seriously damaged humans before it's closer to perfected. But IMO it will be improved until it's in common use, unless a different technique comes along. In the mean time there's little point to banning it.

Governments that fight markets never win. If Europe and the US ban this technology that just means progress will continue in other places. And there are other reasons than eliminating disease. I could argue the ethics, but that's not the point. Like it or not people are going to do it. We live in the last fully nature-made generation.

Wrong is not the same as "fake". Fake news is stuff that's made up.

One way you can tell the difference is by whether a correction is made when the error is pointed out. The Time story about the MLK bust you list as fake news, for example, was followed by a correction and an apology. That's journalism. Nobody is perfect; journalism consists of acknowledging and correcting mistakes.
Check here:
http://time.com/4645541/donald...

To verify, here is the article, dated 20 January. Note that the incorrect information is removed, and the article has a correction also dated 20 January:
http://time.com/4642088/trump-...

The correction reads: Correction: An earlier version of the story said that a bust of Martin Luther King had been moved. It is still in the Oval Office.

To verify that the correction wasn't backdated, here's the archived version of the article as of 1AM on Jan 21. Notice the correction: http://web.archive.org/web/201...

That's the difference.

Wrong is not the same as "fake". Fake news is stuff that's made up.

One way you can tell the difference is by whether a correction is made when the error is pointed out. The Time story about the MLK bust you list as fake news, for example, was followed by a correction and an apology. That's journalism. Nobody is perfect; journalism consists of acknowledging and correcting mistakes.
Check here:
http://time.com/4645541/donald...

To verify, here is the article, dated 20 January. Note that the incorrect information is removed, and the article has a correction also dated 20 January:
http://time.com/4642088/trump-...

The correction reads: Correction: An earlier version of the story said that a bust of Martin Luther King had been moved. It is still in the Oval Office.

To verify that the correction wasn't backdated, here's the archived version of the article as of 1AM on Jan 21. Notice the correction: http://web.archive.org/web/201...

That's the difference.

Both items were passed off as "news" by seemingly legitimate news organizations. Both items are fake news - literally fake.

You seem to not understand the difference between "fake" and "incorrect/erroneous" If you hand a bouncer a "fake ID" at a bar, it doesn't mean you accidentally handed them someone else's ID or maybe accidentally handed credentials that were expired or otherwise unacceptable to get into a bar. A "fake ID" implies that you KNOWINGLY manufactured a false ID (or had someone do it for you) with intent to pass it off as real.

Do you have evidence that the reporters in question actually INTENTIONALLY passed along false information? If not, they were not "fake news" according to the standard definition of the English word "fake."

And they offered corrections. Here's the detailed account from Time about the MLK bust. The reporter corrected his tweets as soon as he had recognized an error. That's NOT what actual "fake news" sites do -- because fake news sites KNOW their information is false when they MAKE IT UP, so they don't offer corrections.

As for the other incident, it's yet another example of poor reporting, but only because the Olympian gave an interview that IMPLIED a connection with Trump's immigration policies and only FOUR DAYS LATER tweeted that actually the incident occurred in December. Again, we should be critical for poor reporting here that then made an EXPLICIT connection with Trump, it should have fact-checked when the event actually occurred, but the Olympian in question was vague in her original interview and implied it had happened recently.

So, who exactly is at fault here? The Olympian was expressing concern over current immigration policies and made a vague reference to detention, which was only later clarified. Was she part of some massive media "conspiracy" to hide the truth until four days later? Or did she just innocently make reference in an interview to an unpleasant experience that occurred to her in immigration recently -- and some media articles misinterpreted her vague timeline?

I'm NOT going to excuse those media reporters who implied a Trump connection -- they made a serious journalistic error by not doing appropriate fact-checking. We should condemn their actions and poor journalism.

But once more detailed information became available, they corrected their stories -- once again, that's NOT the practice of "fake news."

There are various bad journalistic practices in the world. And we should condemn them, and even fire journalists sometimes for making truly egregious errors or showing unreasonable bias or whatever. BUT UNINTENTIONAL ERRORS ARE NOT "FAKE NEWS." Fake news is a separate problem -- and a serious one that we ignore by misusing the English word "fake" or redefining it to dilute its meaning.

Travel / tourism to US is plummeting.
The size of the effect varies by source:

6.5% - http://www.reuters.com/article...
17% - http://time.com/money/4662727/...
25% - https://www.theguardian.com/tr...
50% - http://ttgnordic.com/interest-...

I am European.
I have been to United States tens of times, both on company budget and on my own.
I won't come back, unless pressed really hard by my employer.
Why should I?
The world is full of wonderful places.
Why should I choose a country which is openly hostile to visitors?

And Presidents don't plan raids and other tactical operations. At most they get advised that a raid is planned and ready to be executed on their approval, but the planning is all much lower. Any failures in the planning are at the tactical unit level and maybe as high as JSOC but not above that.

Unfortunately (and sometimes fortunately), presidents do sometimes get involved at the tactical level.

Moreover, I agree with AC's "the buck stops over there" comment. Let's be honest, if Hillary was president during this raid the GOP would be holding hearings and accusing her of intentionally killing SEALs.

My father pointed out to me that the nuclear carriers can be a great help after humanitarian disasters as they can desalinate large quantities of water. I found an article about the Carl Vincent that says that it can desalinate 400,000 gallons of water a day. We stationed it off the coast of Haiti after the earthquakes there.

http://content.time.com/time/s...

You are right that we have a long history of people crying wolf. As part of a course on the policy and ethical implications of AI, I am teaching the history of Luddite reactions from the printing press to the more recent robotic "revolution". Even recently with ATMs, there was a prediction of fewer branches and tellers which did not happen. So we're good right? Well...

Unfortunately, there is one thing that should stand out as being potentially different this time -- in previous instances of the Chicken Little scenarios, it was those who were worried about being displaced that were sounding the alarm, not those creating the technology. This time, it's the other way around. The vast majority of AI researchers, particularly in the private sector, are bullish on the elimination of most blue-collar and service jobs (even management and hedge fund investors are not safe) in the not too distant future. And if you have doubts, we have ample room to believe that the changes are not 50 years away:

• Manufacturing jobs are finally returning to North America...for robots
• Chinese factory replaces 90% of human workers with robots. Production rises by 250%, defects drop by 80%
• BBC News: Foxconn replaces '60,000 factory workers with robots'
• Attention all humans of Shanghai! Robo chefs will now whip you up a bowl of ramen in 90 seconds flat
• Japanese white-collar workers are already being replaced by artificial intelligence
• Mining 24 Hours a Day with Robots
• China Has Launched the Robocops You Have Been Waiting For
• Robots are already replacing fast-food workers Trump’s pick for labor chief, the CEO of Hardee's and Carl’s Jr., likes the idea.
• Inside Silicon Valley’s Robot Pizzeria
• Fmr. McDonald's USA CEO: $35K Robots Cheaper Than Hiring at $15 Per Hour
• Fast-food CEO says he's investing in machines because the government is making it difficult to afford employees

And other things to think about....

• Dallas Police Used Robot With Bomb to Kill Ambush Suspect
• Microsoft Foresees AR Tracking Your Keys, Milk, Entire Life
• White House: US Needs a Stronger Social Safety Net To Help Workers Displaced by Robots
• McKinsey's 2016 Analy

when men are in oversupply, the dating culture emphasizes courtship and monogamy. But when women are in oversupply—as they are today at most U.S. colleges and universities—men play the field and women are more likely to be treated as sex objects.

What I said is that in the Bay Area, where men outnumber women, it's a "woman's market" and they can afford to be more choosy and less promiscuous. That seems to match up with this guy's claim.

I went to every college in the area and said "If you have taken a programming class, I want you. I'll pay you. I'll train you in the languages we use" and no responses. Why??

Because a high school dropout can pull 45k managing A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT. (at least for a little while longer)

A high school GRADUATE can pull 50k+ working a call center.

A college GRADUATE *needs* to command 60k+ just to cover the overhead from 4 years of loans.

You know the workers exists, you said so in your post. Yet you fill your US funded lab with foreigners and wonder what the problem is. Are *YOU* working for 45k a year?

Looks like the cost of living in MD is 30% higher than the average accost the board.

Your offer of 45k a year is quite low, or spot-dead average (depending on who you ask) for a fresh bachelors degree.

That's why. Raise your offer by 31% and when your foreign nationals are sent home and you will instead draw local talent. This is the POINT. Stop pretending to be clueless. It sounds like you are in a leadership position and are seeing the effects of the wage deflation this discussion is all about first hand. You're not going to see much sympathy, but you Will get through it.

Look on the bright side, soon you will be improving the lives of 6 American families, and all of the local businesses they frequent.

Re: traditional gender roles. I disagree with Social Conservatives but their position /= fascism.

Traditional gender roles, assumed voluntarily, are 100% fine. Passing laws to punish those who don't conform to them is absolutely not OK.

Re: voting: I'm 100% in favor of showing ID to vote.

I used to be, except that there have been statistically almost zero cases of confirmed voter fraud. IDs don't prevent documented fraud like Gregg Phillips being registered simultaneously in three different states.

You would have a receipt with your hash.

No, no, no, no, no. This is how you get massive voter fraud. Imagine if you got a receipt that could reveal your voting. Now imagine:

• A union steward forcing employees to prove they voted correctly
• A factory owner having a mandatory "let's compare our votes" party
• An abusive husband making his wife demonstrate that she chose his favorite candidates

That would end anonymous voting, which is a cornerstone of democracy: you can't have democracy without it.

I have not seen that yet. I have seen people who are known defenders of free-market.

There are known defenders laissez-faire market, but that's not at all the same thing as a free market. I prefer my economies free as in GPL, not as in BSD.

Assuming you aren't allergic or just avoiding the operation from fear of general anaesthesia.
Sorry for the old article, but worth considering.
http://healthland.time.com/201...

Isn't all of SV SJW? I just heard that story from peter thiel who almost was kicked from the facebook board (even though he was an early investor) just because he endorsed an anti SJW presidential candidate and went to RNC [1] [2] [3]. He was the first openly gay man to speak at the RNC! Apparently thats not SJW enough for SV. Or github which nukes entire repositories just for using certain words [2]. So Mozilla isn't the only SJW company in SV, its part of their style.

[1] : http://www.forbes.com/sites/ka...
[2] : https://www.theguardian.com/te...
[3] : http://time.com/4417679/republ...
[3] : https://www.techdirt.com/artic...

! Then, when the Earth is unlivable, these billionaires will escape to Mars.

There is nothing that mankind could conceivably do that would make Earth more unlivable than Mars.

Seriously.
One damn planet in the entire universe, maybe, where you can walk around in your shirt sleeves sometimes and enjoy it, and we treat it as disposable.

! Then, when the Earth is unlivable, these billionaires will escape to Mars.

There is nothing that mankind could conceivably do that would make Earth more unlivable than Mars.

I can't help it, but those reports have been increasing in numbers rapidly

Well, obviously, human activity is responsible — do you want me to draw you a hockey-stick diagram?

Just goes to show, how irresponsible some humans (and RethugliKKKan$ in particular) are about our planet...

And it is going to get worse! Then, when the Earth is unlivable, these billionaires will escape to Mars.

I have seen people on slashdot accuse you of rape too. Does that make it a fact? Watch, I'll add another: PopeRatzo raped me. Boom! Fact.

Funny thing about the internet. You can check whether stuff has been reported before.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/a...
http://fusion.net/story/328522...
http://gawker.com/the-time-don...
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
http://www.newyorker.com/magaz...
http://www.inquisitr.com/36114...
http://time.com/4572925/megyn-...
http://www.rollingstone.com/po...
http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/1...

There. That oughtta do it.

Now, where is the evidence that PopeRatzo raped you?

yes, but why did Putin's actions for the last 5 years do nothing?

Putin haven't talked about using nuclear weapons in public. Trump has — repeatedly.

http://time.com/4437089/donald-trump-nuclear-weapons-nukes/

The artificial scarcity serves the same purpose. If the profit margin is high a driver doesn't need to self-exploit. Tired drivers are a public risk, and enforcement alone will not do the trick (and is expensive).

None of this is new. http://time.com/3592035/uber-t...

Only the self driving cars will substantially alter the equation.

Sorry. The DMCA is Republican creation. Republicans are only opposed to laws created by Democrats.

Why is this modded flamebait? The members of the republican party admitted to deliberately voting against anything proposed by the Democrats during Obama's time

I'm sure Time is fake news too. As is the Washington Post, MSNBC, and the 124 various other sources that reported on the 2009 McConnell obstruction meeting

http://swampland.time.com/2012...

Aptly titled “My eyes are up here,” lead researcher Sarah Gervais’ study found that men like looking at women’s large breasts. For extended periods of time. Although, in dudes’ defense, “women also seem to view other women as objects.”

A total of 29 women and 36 men outfitted in eye tracking gear were asked to look at pictures of models manipulated to have different body types. Both men and women looked at breasts and waists longer than faces. Furthermore, women with hourglass figures received more substantial stares and were rated as having better personalities. Because boobs.

But if you were a woman you'd already know this because you would have experienced it first hand. And please note - the lead researcher was a woman.

I'll see your Nobel Laureate, and raise you 36 Nobel Laureates.

Not that any of their opinions matter half as much as a practicing climatologist's, since expertise in the field is the only way to reach an informed conclusion. By contrast, your chosen authority freely admits:

"I am not really terribly interested in global warming. Like most physicists I don't think much about it. But in 2008 I was in a panel here about global warming and I had to learn something about it. And I spent a day or so - half a day maybe on Google, and I was horrified by what I learned..."

What other facts are you guys going to object to? Yaknow your BFF even wanted to bring back whaling, when there isn't even a domestic whaling industry to pander to?

Like this?

Probably an early prototype formulation of Kraft Macaroni and Cheese

I'm not bitching about white people. I am one. But when 20% of Trump voters openly believe that getting rid of black slavery was a bad idea, these people putting Trump over the top, I'm not going to pretend that it's not a fact.

Taking note of racists and racist attitudes isn't itself racist, guy. And trying to pretend that it is, is obvious projection on your part. So I'll let others decide who is in fact the racist pile of shit in this conversation.

Or, maybe we could all just work fewer hours per week. Which would leave more time for, you know, living.

Bingo. That was the prediction of the 50's, it's just happening later than we thought it would: http://time.com/3754781/1965-p...

a 20 mile tether doesn't sound practical

It's not just impractical; it's downright dangerous, even with much shorter lengths. If tether breaks at the ground end, interesting things can happen.

Or, what's actually part of the historical record, a compromise to empower the institution of slavery: http://time.com/4558510/electoral-college-history-slavery/

The funny thing is with all the cash they have on hand Apple could easily fund R&D and innovation without impacting profits at all.

Ahem. They spent $10 BILLION on R&D last year. It wasn't ALL Hookers and Blow...

Well, yeah. Apple is the most profitable company in existence. R&D is an expense. So they could be spending a lot more on R&D. But then they would only be profitable and not the most profitable, which I guess is unacceptable to them.

Apple spent something like $10 BEEELION on R&D last year alone. A 30% increase Year-over-Year I might add.

How much do you think Dell, Lenovo, HP, Asus, Acer, etc. spend TOGETHER on R&D?

In the end the Russian people chose--and chose decisively--to reject the past. Voting in the final round of the presidential election last week, they preferred Boris Yeltsin to his Communist rival Gennadi Zyuganov by a margin of 13 percentage points. He is far from the ideal democrat or reformer, and his lieutenants Victor Chernomyrdin and Alexander Lebed are already squabbling over power, but Yeltsin is arguably the best hope Russia has for moving toward pluralism and an open economy. By re-electing him, the Russians defied predictions that they might willingly resubmit themselves to communist rule.

The outcome was by no means inevitable. Last winter Yeltsin's approval ratings were in the single digits. There are many reasons for his change in fortune, but a crucial one has remained a secret. For four months, a group of American political consultants clandestinely participated in guiding Yeltsin's campaign. Here is the inside story of how these advisers helped Yeltsin achieve the victory that will keep reform in Russia alive.

Focus on the bold texts, how nice the good guys Time preferred to describe, compare to:

Time 2016: Russia Wants to Undermine Faith in the US Election Don't Fall for It

Since the spring, U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies have seen mounting evidence of an active Russian influence operation targeting the 2016 presidential election...., undermining faith in the result and in democracy itself.
......
Russia’s interference in the U.S. election is an extraordinary escalation of an already worrying trend.
......
in Trump, Putin has found an almost perfect, if unwitting, ally for his influence operation.

What? You think the Chinese fucking CARE?

This is from a 2013 Time article (emphasis added):

In a 2007 survey, the IFAW [International Fund for Animal Welfare] discovered that 70% of Chinese polled did not know that ivory came from dead elephants. This led to the organization's first ad campaign- a simple poster explaining the actual origins of ivory. A campaign evaluation earlier this year found that the ad, promoted by the world's largest outdoor advertising company JC Decaux, had been seen by 75% by China's urban population, and heavily impacted their view on ivory. Among people classified as "high risk"- that is, those likeliest to buy ivory- the proportion who would actually do so after seeing the ad was almost slashed by half.

Trump is right, these darn cyber-puters are too fast and nobody knows what they are doing.

http://time.com/4619337/donald...

Because California wants to remove itself. See also: CalExit.

Texas has had a secession movement since time was time.

Fake news is likely to be on both sides.

That is, things are always NOT simple as black and white, as MSM, and some people here try to paint.
Recently, the Poles nationalists shouted slogans against Ukrainians, and a day later Poland quickly blamed Russia for this.
So, Yushchenko pro-Western president in 2004, granted Bandera "Hero of Ukraine", and Poroshenko pro-Western president in 2016, renamed "Moscow Avenue" to "Bandera Avenue", which more or less have raised the long, hidden conflicts between Ukraine-Poland are also Russian hybridwar?

Note: for another perspective, the difference between Time magazine 2016 and 1996?
1996: Yanks to the rescue. The secret story of how American advisers helped Yeltsin win

For four months, a group of American political consultants clandestinely participated in guiding Yeltsin's campaign. Here is the inside story of how these advisers helped Yeltsin achieve the victory that will keep reform in Russia alive.

2016: Russia Wants to Undermine Faith in the US Election Don't Fall for It

What relevance is ANY education to the successful running of a huge multinational corporation? Being a lying conniving narcissistic psychopath is the current path to the top, the golden parachute when the business tanks, and repeating the experience over and over for profit. The more hurt you inflict on the workforce (see "Chainsaw Al" as the canonical example of the breed).

For an executive, the game is all about deftly managing a workforce composed of actual human beings while meeting the demands of the bottom line. The greatest of bosses can even become your friend as they bring smiles to shareholders' faces. On the other end of the spectrum are leaders like Al Dunlap, also known as the Chainsaw. Now retired, Dunlap spent his career hopping from one corporate boardroom to the next, applying a myopic obsession with his companies' financials at the expense of absolutely everything else. During his stint atop Scott Paper, a tenure that began in 1994, Dunlap engineered a corporate restructuring that put 35% of the workforce (or 11,000 people) out of a job. The move simultaneously brought a rise in share value of 225%, and resulted in Kimberly-Clark buying out Scott Paper the year after Dunlap took the helm.

Capitalizing on his own fame, Dunlap wrote a best-selling manifesto titled Mean Business. But making a career out of business brutality would prove his undoing. An ensuing stint at Sunbeam imploded when Dunlap was confronted in a 1998 investors' meeting over his strategy of moving up sales dates for consumer goods like outdoor cooking grills well ahead of delivery in order to advance quarterly sales statistics. After the investors' meeting, at which 200 Wall Street honchos were in attendance, Dunlap accosted one of his skeptics, placing his hand over an employee's mouth and, according to a report by the magazine then known as Businessweek, yelled into his ear, "You son of a bitch. If you want to come after me, I'll come after you twice as hard." Dunlap's financial craftiness was widely viewed to have crossed the lines of accounting norms, and he was let go later that year. Sunbeam could never shake the taint caused by Dunlap and filed for bankruptcy in 2001.

This same "packing the channel with goods and marking them as sold on financials was also what brought Michael Copeland (Corel) down. You can destroy any business by being a short-sighted sneaky bastard.

Link

Is a fib really a fib if the teller is unaware that he is uttering an untruth? That question appears to be the basis of the White House defense, having now admitted a falsehood in President Bush's claim, in his State of the Union address, that Iraq had tried to buy uranium in Africa. But that defense is under mounting pressure from a variety of sources claiming that the White House could not have been unaware that the claim was false, because it had been checked out — and debunked — by U.S. intelligence a year before the President repeated it.

So, the White House is not contesting the fact that the President made a false claim — merely whether he, or those who prepared his speech, knew at the time that it was false. And holding the line forces White House press secretary Ari Fleischer into a rhetorical dance that can only be called Clintonesque: conceding on the one hand that the claim made by the President was based on forged evidence that Iraq had tried to buy "yellow cake" refined uranium from Niger, but at the same time maintaining that "I see nothing that goes broader that would indicate that there was no basis to the President's broader statement."

Um...the explosion in filibusters? More done against the Dems than in all previous Congresses combined. Or perhaps the meeting with GOP leadership on the night of his inauguration? http://swampland.time.com/2012... "If he's for it we need to be against it". Even during the economic crisis to the detriment of the country.

The study, by economist Angus Deaton and psychologist Daniel Kahneman, who has won a Nobel Prize for Economics, analyzed the responses of 450,000 Americans polled by Gallup and Healthways in 2008 and 2009.

This isn't bullshit, it was a massive study with very interesting results that surprised many people.

Thanks Trump!

Don't forget Bush! Obama inherited DEA from his predecessor, didn't he? 8 years of Presidency is not enough to fix a federal law-enforcement agency, especially if you pick Attorney Generals for their Social Justice credentials, rather than the ability to run a sizeable organization. (An ability, Obama himself never had either.)

And, unlike closing Guantanamo, Obama never even promised to reign-in the Drug Enforcement Administration — so we can't hold him responsible for its abuses, can we?

Watching Veritas' videos exposing campaign disruptions and voter corruption in the Democrat Party and the shenanigans the Republicans pulled trying to defeat Trump as well.
https://www.youtube.com/channe...

Watch what? Words out of somebody's mouth? Why didn't we get videos of ACTUAL buses being driven around? Why do we never get that?

Critical analysis shows the failure.

No matter how much editing Snopes claims O'Keefe has done, the entirety of all videos are available for examination AND there is no denying that the Democrat operatives said what they said and no reason to disbelieve that they did what they said they did.

Actually, Jerry, based on what O'Keefe's done in the past, including the result of the Planned Parenthood investigations that came out of his lies, there is zero reason to believe anything he produces. That you cite him, so uncritically, is a reason to disbelieve you.

"The results are to be delivered to Obama before he leaves the [sic] office".

Why? It would make better sense if the results were turned over to Mr Trump, who will be in a position to learn from them and take any appropriate action.

Publicly, at least, Trump is denying Russian involvement, facts be damned. I am going to give the current President the benefit of the doubt and say he's doing it to help persuade Donald Trump that it's something he needs to take seriously.

I don't think it's a ploy to score political points because there are none to score.

Agreed that 90% of all studies have been found to be either badly set up or outright wrong, but that's the nature of the beast. 90% of everything is crap, and it takes time to separate the wheat from the bullshit. But we do eventually get it right.

It usually takes about half the current practitioners to die out for new ideas to gain currency, and that has pretty much always been the case in many endeavors. Case in point - post-menopausal hormone therapy. Premarin and Prempro were two of the most sold drugs in the US until 2004, when the government closed down the Women's Health Initiative study because of higher risks associated with HRT.

Now we know the study was bullshit, because every single woman in the study was using Premarin or Prempro - forms of estrogen collected from the urine of pregnant mares that are not bio-compatible with humans, and contain enzymes simply not meant to be found in human beings. Cut one open and you can smell the horse piss.

And yet doctors still do everything they can to discourage women from HRT based on that study, even though it's based on horse hormones, and not estradiol (a form of biocompatible estrogen). Even though women have lost so much bone density that some of them break their ribs just by sneezing. When this condition occurs in children, we do everything we can, but because it's old people, somehow the same medical condition is "normal" and not worth the risks of treating. Look at broken hips - 56% of men who break their hips never return home, same as 37% of women. And yet hormone therapy can prevent this in both sexes. Estrogen is also a potent antidepressant, and obviously guys on testosterone therapy are going to feel better about themselves as well. Duh! Better to have many more suicides than a few more strokes because suicide is the patient's fault.

It's like we're not to be trusted in being able to evaluate what the best option is for our individual situations based on full disclosure of all risks and benefits. So much for patient autonomy and informed consent.

All thanks to group think in the medical community.

It is impossible to think that the 1% could engage in pedophile activities. Luckily, this sort of fake news will soon be illegal.

Seeing as 90% of all medical research is flawed, (and no, this is not some crank - it's pretty much accepted in research because of the evidence, as well as researchers personal knowledge/experience of bad studies we need to test against placebos, because some of the supposedly beneficial treatments are later found to be harmful.

Remember thalidomide? Or more recently, the panic over hormone replacement therapy because the biggest, best trial of HRT ever was started prematurely because it purported to show harmful effects of estrogen? 10s of millions of women world-wide were suddenly put on antidepressants to help deal with menopause side-effects. Turns out that the study was bogus, but more than a decade later, many doctors still haven't got the memo.

The flaw in the study was in using only estrogen from pregnant mare urine (Premarin and Prempro). Equine estrogen is not bio-identical to human estrogen (estradiol estrogen is), but it also contains equine enzymes that the human body has never seen in nature and can't handle - which cause, among other things, liver failure. Having horse enzymes in your blood, your organs, your brain ... that's going to cause problems. Also, progestins were included in HRT even though not needed, further increasing the risk. So this "definitive" study was harmful to people.

Heart attack is the #1 killer of women (no, not breast cancer). Estrogen helps protect against cardiovascular diseases. So people on a placebo would have been healthier, with less chance of sudden death.

Studies also show it's a potent anti-depressive, and delays the onset of Alzheimers and other dementias. Those are sentences of a slow death. It also reduces or stops suicidal ideation.

It also slows down bone demineralization by enabling the digestive system to take up more calcium (which is why calcium supplementation by itself doesn't work - if your body can't absorb it, you'll just eliminate it). 28% of women and 37% of men who fracture their hip die within one year. Considering that 1 in 3 women and 1 in 5 men will get at least 1 hip fracture, that's a significant amount of women who are now at higher risk because of this "greatest study ever."

So even the best studies need to be re-done, because if this study had included a placebo as well as Premarin, and also included other sources of estrogen such as estradiol, Premarin would have been singled out as the biggest contribution to health risk from HRT.

So placebos have a place - they would have saved millions of women from premature death, not endangered them further. That's why we do studies, and why we include placebos. Plus, placebos also work even when the patient is told that it's just a sugar pill. That's why you compare the benefits of a course of treatment with a placebo as well as no treatment. Why prescribe a drug with bad side effects when a placebo performs either as well or better? Not including placebos places people depending on the results of the study to make informed decisions at risk of making bad decisions. Some of those are fatal.