> Checks and balances is such an outdated system that we can just forget it exists. Whatever Congress or the President decrees is the law, no exceptions.
Two laws were in play. The new law did not say that it overrode the old law. You are butt hurt that the judiciary didn't just make shit up. You're stupid to think something like that will never come back to hurt you.
If a "liberal" can do it for "liberal reasons" then so can your enemies.
> Yeah, and activists knew full well that this was case that would have gone the other way if the seat had not been stolen for Gorsuch.
That's a pretty sad statement about liberal judges if you think that NONE of them can interpret the law without inserting their own personal partisan agenda into it.
It's funny how statists will pretend that government accurately reflects the will of the people until it doesn't suit them. Ultimately all government policy is a reflection of this.
Nowhere is this more evident with TEACHERS. A certain contingent loves to whine about how poorly teachers are paid. The great irony there is that public schools are managed locally and school budgets are controlled by the voters directly.
Did you vote for the last school bond issue? How did you vote? Are you yourself willing to increase your own taxes so a teacher can get paid better?
> Hey, here's a new concept for you. Your experiences are not that same as everyone else's.
Except you have ZERO experience. You just blindly swallow propaganda and media narrative. Some of us grew up working class. We have plenty of experience to draw from. We don't have to speculate about this stuff.
Alternatively, this is the information age.
If you want to spin a narrative, you can actually back up your hysterical nonsense with proof. You don't have to make up fantasies supported by absolutely nothing.
Class actions are the only remedy with any teeth. Law enforcement or regulations require an enforcement mechanism that actually cares. Regulatory punishments may not be severe enough to discourage bad behavior.
Your leftism manifests as statism here. You view government as the only entity capable of solving a problem when it's probably the least effective option available.
As a leftist of course you despise the idea that someone is making a buck ensuring that your rights are upheld. You despise people making a buck in general.
Like anything else, the problem isn't the technology. This isn't a "science" issue or about how willing you are to fellate scientists. This is about corporations that would happily grind you into crackers if they thought they could make money off of it and get away with it.
This is about who you trust:
Do you trust a monk? Do you trust a college professor? Do you trust the CEO of Monsanto?
> If you want them to be successful later in life and be able to integrate seemlessly into the modern business and financial world, I would suggest Microsoft Windows
These are modern children we are talking about, not middle aged dinosaurs ready to be put out to pasture.
Kids aren't nearly that stupid. They can manage to use one brand of app and apply the same concepts to another. Someone under the age of 10 might be exposed to Linux or MacOS and not even percieve these as distinct platforms.
Your sort of zealotry is gravely outdated.
Besides, whatever they learn in the Microsoft space today will be gravely outdated by the time they might be exposed to it in the "real world".
> Literally every other developed nation on the planet accomplishes this without spending 100% of their budget on healthcare.
No they don't. The NHS rations all kinds of stuff. Even before the Tories came along as a scapegoat, this was a common acknowledged problem in Canada.
The problem with "government freebies" is that everyone hates taxes. Nobody wants to pay for the "government freebies". Sooner or later there is going to be a budget cut or someone you don't like is going to get elected.
It's really quite deranged. You are cheering for people like Bernie and Hillary to give control of your future cancer treatment to the likes of Trump and Ryan.
I would rather vote for Cruz than someone that would give Cruz control of my cancer treatment.
> If you think the answer should be yes, then you need to discuss how it is paid for.
You put your money where your mouth is and you open your wallet. You don't leave it to anyone else. You don't pretend that you can just soak the rich or gut the Pentagon.
Conservatives can play that game even better than you can.
Admittedly a CT scan is a pretty expensive procedure. Although reimbursement rates for blood work are pretty low. Even the "rack rates" for basic blood work is not a budget buster.
Most blood work is done by machines. They look like something out of old Trek but larger.
America already has government health care and it's a disgrace. This isn't some fantasy where the idolized version of Sweden will magically appear. If you force more Americans on government health care we will end up with more of Medicaid, Medicare, and the VA.
All other arguments fail in the face that America has already tried and continues to fail badly at this sort of thing.
It's not some abstract theory. You can find yourself a Vet or an old person and ask them yourself.
> How often should I eat red meat then? If it's not a simple answer, it requires knowledge.
Not really. The hype against red meat is mostly bullshit. The more important things to consider are nutrients of various kinds. Are you getting what you need and avoiding what you don't.
Protein? Fat? B12?
NONE of these thing have anything to do with the media war against red meat.
A much more relevant question would be whether or not a particular food is part of your natural diet based on where your grandparents or from or what they ate.
You can pretty much ignore anyone that's trying to scare you away from something because of "cancer".
> The US food pyramid is meant to be easy, and while it's better than nothing it's not what dietitians recommend either for diabetes, heart failure, or weight loss. It's pretty far from a medically tailored diet.
Bullshit. It replaced something even simpler that could be distilled down to a single overriding principle: moderation. The old food guidelines had an easy to remember mnemonic and a jingle. It even came with supporting "propaganda" in the form of educational adventures supporting the narrative.
Of course people are lazy. That doesn't mean that people don't have the time. Much of society is quite willing to make up excuses. Plenty of people want to be let off the hook for their own choices.
> Did you forget it was ok to change your mind on many things, even fundamental things?
Why would you ever trust anyone like that? What else might they suddenly change their mind about?
My opinion on gay marriage has never changed. It has ALWAYS been more liberal than the current "liberal" position. It's that way based on first principles that I've always applied in the same way.
Modern liberals are demonstrating quite well that they have no principles at all and are willing to be much more of a genuine threat to democracy and liberty than some stupid Internet troll.
There is actually a great deal of genuine corporate welfare in America.
Trump's tax cut is not an example of that.
If you weren't such a completely lazy partisan sheep, you might have actually cited some real examples rather than repeating liberal media talking points. You have all of the appearance of someone that might actually give a damn but NONE of the substance.
> Well, there was the alternative of stopping to "believe" ridiculous lies because they happen to be expedient to your pet political ideology.
It turns out that a man's wife is no substitute for the man himself. Getting elected president requires certain things like charisma and not insulting half of the country. This country is still a democracy and getting elected requires more than feeling entitled and thinking it's your turn.
Some people thought we had only one electoral n00b. In truth we really had two.
> He will not consider the opinion of someone who's sexual orientation is an abomination to God and nature.
You don't even need to go that far when someone intentionally confuses illegal alien with "immigrant". Although I am not sure what stake the guy really has here beyond "virtue signaling". Silicon Valley is the domain of H1Bs, not people that wade across the Rio Grand.
I personally know guys that have been here (legally) for 20 years that I wouldn't necessarily consider "immigrants".
Slashdot Mirror
Real science doesn't come with a political agenda.
Politics is as distinct from science as religion is. People with an agenda are just abusing statistics.
Continue these delusions of yours at your peril.
> Checks and balances is such an outdated system that we can just forget it exists. Whatever Congress or the President decrees is the law, no exceptions.
Two laws were in play. The new law did not say that it overrode the old law. You are butt hurt that the judiciary didn't just make shit up. You're stupid to think something like that will never come back to hurt you.
If a "liberal" can do it for "liberal reasons" then so can your enemies.
> Neil Gorsuch: Fuck checks and balances. Not our job.
It's not his job to enforce your political agenda regardless of what the statute actually. Quite the opposite really.
> Yeah, and activists knew full well that this was case that would have gone the other way if the seat had not been stolen for Gorsuch.
That's a pretty sad statement about liberal judges if you think that NONE of them can interpret the law without inserting their own personal partisan agenda into it.
> Don't confuse the government for the people.
It's funny how statists will pretend that government accurately reflects the will of the people until it doesn't suit them. Ultimately all government policy is a reflection of this.
Nowhere is this more evident with TEACHERS. A certain contingent loves to whine about how poorly teachers are paid. The great irony there is that public schools are managed locally and school budgets are controlled by the voters directly.
Did you vote for the last school bond issue? How did you vote? Are you yourself willing to increase your own taxes so a teacher can get paid better?
> Venezuela is just authoritarianism calling itself socialism. It's a stupid strawman to bring to an argument.
Socialism is authoritarianism. You give the state unlimited control. The state uses it.
Europeans are happy to brag about how many senseless rules they have to deal with.
> Hey, here's a new concept for you. Your experiences are not that same as everyone else's.
Except you have ZERO experience. You just blindly swallow propaganda and media narrative. Some of us grew up working class. We have plenty of experience to draw from. We don't have to speculate about this stuff.
Alternatively, this is the information age.
If you want to spin a narrative, you can actually back up your hysterical nonsense with proof. You don't have to make up fantasies supported by absolutely nothing.
Class actions are the only remedy with any teeth. Law enforcement or regulations require an enforcement mechanism that actually cares. Regulatory punishments may not be severe enough to discourage bad behavior.
Your leftism manifests as statism here. You view government as the only entity capable of solving a problem when it's probably the least effective option available.
As a leftist of course you despise the idea that someone is making a buck ensuring that your rights are upheld. You despise people making a buck in general.
Like anything else, the problem isn't the technology. This isn't a "science" issue or about how willing you are to fellate scientists. This is about corporations that would happily grind you into crackers if they thought they could make money off of it and get away with it.
This is about who you trust:
Do you trust a monk?
Do you trust a college professor?
Do you trust the CEO of Monsanto?
There is a chemical additive in American bread that's banned in Europe. This might be your culprit.
> Linux makes a great desktop option for people who don't value their own time.
It's not 1998 anymore. It's time to update your FUD playbook.
> If you want them to be successful later in life and be able to integrate seemlessly into the modern business and financial world, I would suggest Microsoft Windows
These are modern children we are talking about, not middle aged dinosaurs ready to be put out to pasture.
Kids aren't nearly that stupid. They can manage to use one brand of app and apply the same concepts to another. Someone under the age of 10 might be exposed to Linux or MacOS and not even percieve these as distinct platforms.
Your sort of zealotry is gravely outdated.
Besides, whatever they learn in the Microsoft space today will be gravely outdated by the time they might be exposed to it in the "real world".
> Literally every other developed nation on the planet accomplishes this without spending 100% of their budget on healthcare.
No they don't. The NHS rations all kinds of stuff. Even before the Tories came along as a scapegoat, this was a common acknowledged problem in Canada.
The problem with "government freebies" is that everyone hates taxes. Nobody wants to pay for the "government freebies". Sooner or later there is going to be a budget cut or someone you don't like is going to get elected.
It's really quite deranged. You are cheering for people like Bernie and Hillary to give control of your future cancer treatment to the likes of Trump and Ryan.
I would rather vote for Cruz than someone that would give Cruz control of my cancer treatment.
> If you think the answer should be yes, then you need to discuss how it is paid for.
You put your money where your mouth is and you open your wallet. You don't leave it to anyone else. You don't pretend that you can just soak the rich or gut the Pentagon.
Conservatives can play that game even better than you can.
Admittedly a CT scan is a pretty expensive procedure. Although reimbursement rates for blood work are pretty low. Even the "rack rates" for basic blood work is not a budget buster.
Most blood work is done by machines. They look like something out of old Trek but larger.
America already has government health care and it's a disgrace. This isn't some fantasy where the idolized version of Sweden will magically appear. If you force more Americans on government health care we will end up with more of Medicaid, Medicare, and the VA.
All other arguments fail in the face that America has already tried and continues to fail badly at this sort of thing.
It's not some abstract theory. You can find yourself a Vet or an old person and ask them yourself.
That $10,000 ER bill is a total fiction.
ANY American hospital bill is a fiction. At most only 33% of that would ever actually get paid. Standard labs are dirt cheap.
The hospital is providing about $200 of service and claiming it's worth some absurd amount.
The hospital is certainly not out $10K.
Success speaks for itself. The guy is 70. He's already made it to a ripe old age despite what any desperate partisan detractors want to think.
He's like the 100 year old woman that drinks bourbon and smokes cigars.
> How often should I eat red meat then? If it's not a simple answer, it requires knowledge.
Not really. The hype against red meat is mostly bullshit. The more important things to consider are nutrients of various kinds. Are you getting what you need and avoiding what you don't.
Protein? Fat? B12?
NONE of these thing have anything to do with the media war against red meat.
A much more relevant question would be whether or not a particular food is part of your natural diet based on where your grandparents or from or what they ate.
You can pretty much ignore anyone that's trying to scare you away from something because of "cancer".
> The US food pyramid is meant to be easy, and while it's better than nothing it's not what dietitians recommend either for diabetes, heart failure, or weight loss. It's pretty far from a medically tailored diet.
Bullshit. It replaced something even simpler that could be distilled down to a single overriding principle: moderation. The old food guidelines had an easy to remember mnemonic and a jingle. It even came with supporting "propaganda" in the form of educational adventures supporting the narrative.
The pyramid is the opposite of balance.
Of course people are lazy. That doesn't mean that people don't have the time. Much of society is quite willing to make up excuses. Plenty of people want to be let off the hook for their own choices.
> Did you forget it was ok to change your mind on many things, even fundamental things?
Why would you ever trust anyone like that? What else might they suddenly change their mind about?
My opinion on gay marriage has never changed. It has ALWAYS been more liberal than the current "liberal" position. It's that way based on first principles that I've always applied in the same way.
Modern liberals are demonstrating quite well that they have no principles at all and are willing to be much more of a genuine threat to democracy and liberty than some stupid Internet troll.
There is actually a great deal of genuine corporate welfare in America.
Trump's tax cut is not an example of that.
If you weren't such a completely lazy partisan sheep, you might have actually cited some real examples rather than repeating liberal media talking points. You have all of the appearance of someone that might actually give a damn but NONE of the substance.
> Well, there was the alternative of stopping to "believe" ridiculous lies because they happen to be expedient to your pet political ideology.
It turns out that a man's wife is no substitute for the man himself. Getting elected president requires certain things like charisma and not insulting half of the country. This country is still a democracy and getting elected requires more than feeling entitled and thinking it's your turn.
Some people thought we had only one electoral n00b. In truth we really had two.
> He will not consider the opinion of someone who's sexual orientation is an abomination to God and nature.
You don't even need to go that far when someone intentionally confuses illegal alien with "immigrant". Although I am not sure what stake the guy really has here beyond "virtue signaling". Silicon Valley is the domain of H1Bs, not people that wade across the Rio Grand.
I personally know guys that have been here (legally) for 20 years that I wouldn't necessarily consider "immigrants".