During the run-up to the bombing of Iraq, George Bush had an approval rating well over 66% and more than that supported the war. So we're still screwed.
If one were to look at the spending habit of the average American, (the US consumer debt rises every year) it makes it easier to understand the national debt problem. Financial irresponsibility in government is simply a reflection of financial irresponsibility on the part of the American people. People don't care about the national debt because they can't even balance their own checkbook.
Well, it couldn't have gotten that much worse in Iraq, seeing that US led sanctions were literally starving Iraq. But wait, more Iraqis are dying now than under Saddam with this nice civil war we started. Iraq's government has a budget surplus (unlike our own) but the money simply diffuses into the hands of the corrupt stooges we hired. In addition, The USA will likely go bankrupt before we ever "finish the job".
Hmm... seeing that we armed Binladen and the Taliban, as well as Saddam(during the Afghan-Soviet war and the Iran-Iraq war respectively), yeah, we pretty much did that to ourselves
Seems reminiscent of the Soviet situation during the Soviet-Afghan War. While the Mujahadin were bleeding the Soviets, it is important to note that the Soviet installed government in Kabul outlasted the Soviet Union itself.
I'm more pissed that corn based ethanol is the shittiest way possible to complete the ethanol plan. switchgrass grows on far shittier land and produces more. Of course, If we don't stop driving vehicles that get 20> MPG then we can forget about it as we will run out of land before we completely replace oil.
And, even if they did set them free, most would wander aimlessly and starve to death, seeing that they (livestock) evolved under our (humans') patronage.
(3) The reporter and activist went back-and-forth several times, with the activist saying, "There is no doubt," and "We may be uncertain of the cause, but we must not let the common people know that we are uncertain." Agreed.
Sounds like the Straussian philosophy of "noble lies" and "deadly truths". While I enjoy reasonable scientific dialogue, (good enough to make a real biology class) I truly despise some of these activists who treat their beliefs as some infallible truth. To me, these activist are no different then some of the people they claim to oppose. Reminds me of the time I went to California. They had the special $4 a gallon gasoline (probably like $5 by now) and all of this other expensive pollution reducing gear, but 90+% didn't realize that much of the air pollution in California comes over trade winds from the Chinese coal belt. And don't even get me started on the Darwin freaks. Ask them who Alfred Russell Wallace (one of the first environmentalists, BTW was and observe their look of puzzlement
The Democrats roughly equal Labour while the Republicans (also called the GOP) are the approximate of the conservatives in the U.K.
The Republicans are dominated by the neocons (who want the USA to become the next Rome) and the religious right. (who want prayer in school, obscenity laws, anti-gay laws etc.)
The Democrats are more liberal (who want socialized healthcare and the like) (who are concerned with pandering to focus-group politics and pander to such issues as combating internet porn (like the religious right) and regulating video games and the like)
In general, both parties pander to issues(to varying degrees) like: combating internet porn and child oreda (like the religious right) and regulating video games and stopping illegal-immigration the like.(for votes) They also quietly support the interests of big business (for funding) It is hard for a third party because of the massive amounts of money required to win an election. So these are the two groups we're stuck with
Of course, it doesn't really matter since they are both roughly the same. The Democrats raise taxes and the GOP raises inflation. Both parties are mostly for big government. The Democrats want to restrict our liberties "for the children" and the GOP wants to restrict our liberties to "stop the terrorists". We're all screwed in the long run because the GOP is a far more disciplined party than the Democrats so we don't really even have much of an opposition.
The Democrats will do nothing, as they always do. The problem is, quite simply, that the GOP is a far more disciplined political party. The GOP will always vote in lockstep while the Democrats will squabble and argue away any initiative they ever had. Knowing the unique skill the Democrats have in falling apart, I wouldn't be surprised to see a McCain/GOP one party rule again. The issue is that while we have a two party state, the GOP is a vastly more capable party (as far as winning elections goes). So what we get is in effect a one-party state. While the Democrats still exist, they have little ability to stop the policy of the GOP machine.
It's a good question, and one we need answered fast. The suburban soccer mom demographic are proles in the truest sense, as they have no loyalty to any political ideology. They are often the critical "swing" voters that decide elections. They usually decide to vote based on petty, prolefeed issues such as gay marriage or a candidate's sex life or something equally insignificant in the big picture. Not to mention, they tend to favor overprotective measures such as the Bush doctrine of preemptive war or the Patriot Act.
Hmm. I'm not really sure how it is in the north (I live in AL) , but we had this black speaker come for our black history month assembly in February and talk to us for about three hours about "heroes of the African-American community". He, who claimed to have a degree from Tuskeegee on civil rights, always referred to blacks as "African-American". Of course, we got the usual droning on about the history of slavery and civil rights (but oddly enough, affirmative action was never mentioned). The thing that got me was that Lyndon Johnson, despite granting blacks their civil rights, didn't get mentioned once in the speech. Of course, most ordinary people still refer to blacks as blacks and whites are referred to as whites and hispanics (whose population is rapidly growing in the south) are referred to as Mexicans. Unfortunately, many of the people, black, white, or otherwise, do a very poor job of disproving stereotypes of their particular ethnic group. Many blacks drive cars with big ass rims blaring terrible rap/r&b music. Many whites drive their full-size trucks with the stars and bars stickers and straight-pipes blaring some awful country music. It seems to me that ethnic groups are compartmentalized and stereotyped because many among them do their best to be as distinct as possible. Usually its just the media and activists that try to snuff-out any intelligence by using hyphens. Its almost a double standard, people want their hyphens and recognitions and affirmative-action benefits, but they get all pissy about stereotypes.
Actually, Eastern Europe has the higher suicide rates by far. Japan is #10 in the countries with the highest suicide rates. Of the top five highest, four are from the former Soviet Union. Of the top ten highest, 8 of 10 are former eastern-bloc countries. Social and political, as well as economic instability play a large role in increased suicide rates. Religious and social taboos against suicide play a large role in lowering suicide rates. Jokes about suicide bombers aside, the Koran specifically forbids suicide. Suicide is also severely frowned upon by Christianity. Christianity (Catholicism in particular) is practiced strongly in Latin America. Islam is practiced in the Middle East. Hence, the lowered suicide rates where it is culturally unthinkable to commit suicide.
Actually, in the former Soviet Union there were a few projects using low-yield nuclear bombs (3-7KT) to stimulate oil production yields. Results were reportedly quite good, around a 40-80% increase in production. Of course, these may have been CPSU statistics. (optimistic)
Hell, my dad almost bought into it. Even with his lousy and expensive cable service he got Comcast. Luckily, he bought one a new HDTV and actually started caring about his shitty cable service. Now he has AT&T (gotta love duopolies) and Dish Network. I hope it doesn't rain!(after all, while it's raining/storming nobody wants to watch TV)
Which really sucks if you don't live in the high-end neighborhood. One they have cherry-picked the most profitable places, the telcos usually just sit on their money and never build to the other places. I remember in Tennessee there was a huge stink about that practice and there were some bills drafted, not sure what became of it though.
Slashdot Mirror
During the run-up to the bombing of Iraq, George Bush had an approval rating well over 66% and more than that supported the war. So we're still screwed.
If one were to look at the spending habit of the average American, (the US consumer debt rises every year) it makes it easier to understand the national debt problem. Financial irresponsibility in government is simply a reflection of financial irresponsibility on the part of the American people. People don't care about the national debt because they can't even balance their own checkbook.
Well, it couldn't have gotten that much worse in Iraq, seeing that US led sanctions were literally starving Iraq. But wait, more Iraqis are dying now than under Saddam with this nice civil war we started. Iraq's government has a budget surplus (unlike our own) but the money simply diffuses into the hands of the corrupt stooges we hired. In addition, The USA will likely go bankrupt before we ever "finish the job".
Hmm... seeing that we armed Binladen and the Taliban, as well as Saddam(during the Afghan-Soviet war and the Iran-Iraq war respectively), yeah, we pretty much did that to ourselves
Like operation AJAX? (where we overthrew the democratically elected ruler of Iran)
They don't know what the Kama Sutra is.
Seems reminiscent of the Soviet situation during the Soviet-Afghan War. While the Mujahadin were bleeding the Soviets, it is important to note that the Soviet installed government in Kabul outlasted the Soviet Union itself.
Yes, and instead of natural defenses these fat,lazy Americans have these pesky little things called shotguns.
I'm more pissed that corn based ethanol is the shittiest way possible to complete the ethanol plan. switchgrass grows on far shittier land and produces more. Of course, If we don't stop driving vehicles that get 20> MPG then we can forget about it as we will run out of land before we completely replace oil.
Yes. Actually, structurally speaking, pork flesh is very similar to human flesh, and last I checked, pork is pretty tasty so it sounds tasty to me.
And, even if they did set them free, most would wander aimlessly and starve to death, seeing that they (livestock) evolved under our (humans') patronage.
Then the cafeteria food might get even worse
The Democrats roughly equal Labour while the Republicans (also called the GOP) are the approximate of the conservatives in the U.K. The Republicans are dominated by the neocons (who want the USA to become the next Rome) and the religious right. (who want prayer in school, obscenity laws, anti-gay laws etc.) The Democrats are more liberal (who want socialized healthcare and the like) (who are concerned with pandering to focus-group politics and pander to such issues as combating internet porn (like the religious right) and regulating video games and the like) In general, both parties pander to issues(to varying degrees) like: combating internet porn and child oreda (like the religious right) and regulating video games and stopping illegal-immigration the like.(for votes) They also quietly support the interests of big business (for funding) It is hard for a third party because of the massive amounts of money required to win an election. So these are the two groups we're stuck with Of course, it doesn't really matter since they are both roughly the same. The Democrats raise taxes and the GOP raises inflation. Both parties are mostly for big government. The Democrats want to restrict our liberties "for the children" and the GOP wants to restrict our liberties to "stop the terrorists". We're all screwed in the long run because the GOP is a far more disciplined party than the Democrats so we don't really even have much of an opposition.
And, at least in the CIS, they die of mysterious reasons.
One word: Prolefeed
The Democrats will do nothing, as they always do. The problem is, quite simply, that the GOP is a far more disciplined political party. The GOP will always vote in lockstep while the Democrats will squabble and argue away any initiative they ever had. Knowing the unique skill the Democrats have in falling apart, I wouldn't be surprised to see a McCain/GOP one party rule again. The issue is that while we have a two party state, the GOP is a vastly more capable party (as far as winning elections goes). So what we get is in effect a one-party state. While the Democrats still exist, they have little ability to stop the policy of the GOP machine.
It's a good question, and one we need answered fast. The suburban soccer mom demographic are proles in the truest sense, as they have no loyalty to any political ideology. They are often the critical "swing" voters that decide elections. They usually decide to vote based on petty, prolefeed issues such as gay marriage or a candidate's sex life or something equally insignificant in the big picture. Not to mention, they tend to favor overprotective measures such as the Bush doctrine of preemptive war or the Patriot Act.
They look at them and say "the proles will never revolt"
Better yet, B2 stealth bombers.
Hmm. I'm not really sure how it is in the north (I live in AL) , but we had this black speaker come for our black history month assembly in February and talk to us for about three hours about "heroes of the African-American community". He, who claimed to have a degree from Tuskeegee on civil rights, always referred to blacks as "African-American". Of course, we got the usual droning on about the history of slavery and civil rights (but oddly enough, affirmative action was never mentioned). The thing that got me was that Lyndon Johnson, despite granting blacks their civil rights, didn't get mentioned once in the speech. Of course, most ordinary people still refer to blacks as blacks and whites are referred to as whites and hispanics (whose population is rapidly growing in the south) are referred to as Mexicans. Unfortunately, many of the people, black, white, or otherwise, do a very poor job of disproving stereotypes of their particular ethnic group. Many blacks drive cars with big ass rims blaring terrible rap/r&b music. Many whites drive their full-size trucks with the stars and bars stickers and straight-pipes blaring some awful country music. It seems to me that ethnic groups are compartmentalized and stereotyped because many among them do their best to be as distinct as possible. Usually its just the media and activists that try to snuff-out any intelligence by using hyphens. Its almost a double standard, people want their hyphens and recognitions and affirmative-action benefits, but they get all pissy about stereotypes.
Actually, Eastern Europe has the higher suicide rates by far. Japan is #10 in the countries with the highest suicide rates. Of the top five highest, four are from the former Soviet Union. Of the top ten highest, 8 of 10 are former eastern-bloc countries. Social and political, as well as economic instability play a large role in increased suicide rates. Religious and social taboos against suicide play a large role in lowering suicide rates. Jokes about suicide bombers aside, the Koran specifically forbids suicide. Suicide is also severely frowned upon by Christianity. Christianity (Catholicism in particular) is practiced strongly in Latin America. Islam is practiced in the Middle East. Hence, the lowered suicide rates where it is culturally unthinkable to commit suicide.
Actually, in the former Soviet Union there were a few projects using low-yield nuclear bombs (3-7KT) to stimulate oil production yields. Results were reportedly quite good, around a 40-80% increase in production. Of course, these may have been CPSU statistics. (optimistic)
Hell, my dad almost bought into it. Even with his lousy and expensive cable service he got Comcast. Luckily, he bought one a new HDTV and actually started caring about his shitty cable service. Now he has AT&T (gotta love duopolies) and Dish Network. I hope it doesn't rain!(after all, while it's raining/storming nobody wants to watch TV)
Which really sucks if you don't live in the high-end neighborhood. One they have cherry-picked the most profitable places, the telcos usually just sit on their money and never build to the other places. I remember in Tennessee there was a huge stink about that practice and there were some bills drafted, not sure what became of it though.