Well, why shouldn't the government save that group of idiots from their own actions? The government does it for so many other groups already. It seems to be its default action nowadays.
Except for the half of the country that gets snow for months at a time. Or for anyone that needs to carry more than a change of clothes in a dufflebag.
No problem. I do see how that sentence could be read too deeply. But honestly, I do think the electoral college is a good idea. And, unrelated to my opinion about it, it is a fundamental aspect that allowed the Constitution to be finalized and ratified.
There are many people on the right who have that attitude of "Well, it's in the Constitution so I'm in favor of it." But, of course, they have selective support for other parts of the document. Or would not say it if an amendment were passed that specifically allowed/mandated a program they don't like, such as a national health system. Their argument of "It's not in the Constitution" would have to change to "I don't care what's in the Constitution", since they would still be opposed to that program. I consider that group to be 'Constitutional fetishists', because they have that perverse reverence for the document, but only in the form they accept.
Anyway, I apologize for sounding like a dick in that last post. Good to hear another viewpoint here.
OK, I thought you would go with that first one being the logical fallacy, since it is simply an opinion stated as a fact. But you let it go.
The second one though is a basic statement of knowledge. Without the compromises between the large, populous states and the small, non-populous states, the Constitution would have never been finalized, much less signed or ratified. This statement doesn't need an argument, unless we are in a class discussing the crafting of the Constitution. The fact that the electoral college was one of those necessary compromises is why it is a lynchpin. But, again, you let this one go.
You focus on something I never said. I did not assert, or even imply, that all lynchpins were automatically "good". I never said any lynchpin was good, simply because it is a lynchpin. Pointing out the importance of something, within its own context, does not mean I think it is a good thing. In fact, if I don't like the Constitution, and wish it had never been ratified, than logically I would consider its lynchpins to be "bad", since they allowed it to come into existence. Yet this is what you consider a logical fallacy, a line I never said, and don't necessarily agree with in principle.
I'm not saying this to pick a fight or insult you. It just is how it is.
I don't support national popular vote. It doesn't do what we need. And the electoral college isn't just a good idea, it is one of the lynchpins of the Constitution. Without it, you might as well disband the Senate too, since that isn't proportional representation.
Or how about, all the members of the House, Senate, Supreme Court, and the President and Vice President all get into one big group, have a bill introduced, and everyone votes on it en masse. If it's voted for, it is law and constitutional, since the three branches have all agreed. If it is voted down, nothing similar can be brought up until the next government election.
That makes as much sense as national popular voting.
With all the times many people on this board have said the same thing, you would think more people would catch on. But we just keep getting "lesser of two evils" crap.
Well, I'm confused about why you sound so surprised that your friend sent his body into starvation mode.
As for the idiots, they are right about eating less. Your friend just didn't go far enough. Ask him to cut down to 100 calories a day for six months, and see if he loses weight. I bet he would.
Other than that, I'm glad your friend is eating healthier now. I hope he gets to the weight he wants and lives well.
Sure it does. If you drink a lot of water, you body will keep the fat cells full. If you drink very little water, you body will use the water stored in fat cells, and they will be depleted. So the amount of water you consume it as important as all of the other variables everyone here is throwing about.
... But on the bright side we can have Kansas made clips for our guns with any amount of bullets, assault rifles, short shotguns and marijuana is still illegal, untaxed and cheap.
A motion sensor that doesn't need a continuous energy feed could be incorporated, using some sort of pendulum to activate it. The part of the sensor that then activates the GPS could run off a button battery that doesn't feed from the car's system at all. And when the GPS is active, it could disable that circuit to keep the battery from being run down while the car is being used normally.
I'm not saying that is how they would build such a device, but it could be done if your objection is the main problem.
Easy fix there. Just add a cheap motion detector that activates the GPS. Car gets towed, sensor knows it, starts GPS, it transmits like usual until car stops moving for 20 minutes.
In the early 80s we were loading programs off tape drives and playing electronic football with four blips. You think smartphone interfaces would be too difficult to figure out?
You work 18 hour days? Bully for you. You have the chance of using absentee ballot, which is mailed to you, or many/all places allow 'early voting' which happens for weeks before this Tuesday. Stop whining and making up excuses.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, because we all want to be stuck in traffic all day because of the all the freight trains going through our cities every half hour.
If delivery vans can make it through city streets, then Hummers should have no problems doing so too.
Well, why shouldn't the government save that group of idiots from their own actions? The government does it for so many other groups already. It seems to be its default action nowadays.
Except for the half of the country that gets snow for months at a time. Or for anyone that needs to carry more than a change of clothes in a dufflebag.
No problem. I do see how that sentence could be read too deeply. But honestly, I do think the electoral college is a good idea. And, unrelated to my opinion about it, it is a fundamental aspect that allowed the Constitution to be finalized and ratified.
There are many people on the right who have that attitude of "Well, it's in the Constitution so I'm in favor of it." But, of course, they have selective support for other parts of the document. Or would not say it if an amendment were passed that specifically allowed/mandated a program they don't like, such as a national health system. Their argument of "It's not in the Constitution" would have to change to "I don't care what's in the Constitution", since they would still be opposed to that program. I consider that group to be 'Constitutional fetishists', because they have that perverse reverence for the document, but only in the form they accept.
Anyway, I apologize for sounding like a dick in that last post. Good to hear another viewpoint here.
OK, I thought you would go with that first one being the logical fallacy, since it is simply an opinion stated as a fact. But you let it go.
The second one though is a basic statement of knowledge. Without the compromises between the large, populous states and the small, non-populous states, the Constitution would have never been finalized, much less signed or ratified. This statement doesn't need an argument, unless we are in a class discussing the crafting of the Constitution. The fact that the electoral college was one of those necessary compromises is why it is a lynchpin. But, again, you let this one go.
You focus on something I never said. I did not assert, or even imply, that all lynchpins were automatically "good". I never said any lynchpin was good, simply because it is a lynchpin. Pointing out the importance of something, within its own context, does not mean I think it is a good thing. In fact, if I don't like the Constitution, and wish it had never been ratified, than logically I would consider its lynchpins to be "bad", since they allowed it to come into existence. Yet this is what you consider a logical fallacy, a line I never said, and don't necessarily agree with in principle.
I'm not saying this to pick a fight or insult you. It just is how it is.
Hey, how did you know my pc came with that option?
Are you the NSA? Spying on me or something?
He just needs a healthy ovum.
What logical fallacy is that?
I don't support national popular vote. It doesn't do what we need. And the electoral college isn't just a good idea, it is one of the lynchpins of the Constitution. Without it, you might as well disband the Senate too, since that isn't proportional representation.
Or how about, all the members of the House, Senate, Supreme Court, and the President and Vice President all get into one big group, have a bill introduced, and everyone votes on it en masse. If it's voted for, it is law and constitutional, since the three branches have all agreed. If it is voted down, nothing similar can be brought up until the next government election.
That makes as much sense as national popular voting.
With all the times many people on this board have said the same thing, you would think more people would catch on. But we just keep getting "lesser of two evils" crap.
Hey, the nation gets the government we deserve.
Well, I'm confused about why you sound so surprised that your friend sent his body into starvation mode.
As for the idiots, they are right about eating less. Your friend just didn't go far enough. Ask him to cut down to 100 calories a day for six months, and see if he loses weight. I bet he would.
Other than that, I'm glad your friend is eating healthier now. I hope he gets to the weight he wants and lives well.
can I claim the fastest jogging speed? I'm sure I can break that 333km/h in 4.8 seconds. Just before getting smeared across the pavement, of course.
Sure it does. If you drink a lot of water, you body will keep the fat cells full. If you drink very little water, you body will use the water stored in fat cells, and they will be depleted. So the amount of water you consume it as important as all of the other variables everyone here is throwing about.
What was he eating at the 1000 calorie mark? What did he start eating at the higher calorie point?
About a dozen other questions after that.
And the body's starvation mode isn't exactly an unknown mechanism. I don't know why you keep sounding surprised he discovered it.
... But on the bright side we can have Kansas made clips for our guns with any amount of bullets, assault rifles, short shotguns and marijuana is still illegal, untaxed and cheap.
I lost it on those last three words. Good post.
A motion sensor that doesn't need a continuous energy feed could be incorporated, using some sort of pendulum to activate it. The part of the sensor that then activates the GPS could run off a button battery that doesn't feed from the car's system at all. And when the GPS is active, it could disable that circuit to keep the battery from being run down while the car is being used normally.
I'm not saying that is how they would build such a device, but it could be done if your objection is the main problem.
Easy fix there. Just add a cheap motion detector that activates the GPS. Car gets towed, sensor knows it, starts GPS, it transmits like usual until car stops moving for 20 minutes.
In the early 80s we were loading programs off tape drives and playing electronic football with four blips. You think smartphone interfaces would be too difficult to figure out?
The AC above me is a perfect example of JustOK's point.
"Nothing like catching a touchdown pass at the superb owl to scream gay"
I may have missed a Harry Potter movie, but do they use a superb owl while playing quidditch?
The three in the building were in a flight simulator. How horribly ironic.
"You can learn to fly in this machine. It's just like the real jet, except you cannot die."
Then use absentee ballot next time. It's not like you don't know what your schedule is, or work location.
You work 18 hour days? Bully for you. You have the chance of using absentee ballot, which is mailed to you, or many/all places allow 'early voting' which happens for weeks before this Tuesday. Stop whining and making up excuses.
Some of us don't vote for Democrats OR Republicans.