This is what I would do and we would probably instead prefer to own a partial interest in 5 to 10 cars, one of them a pickup for the odd times we need one of those. I'd want to share ownership with people who use the cars at night, or during the workday, the times when I have no need of them.
I don't get why this would be the trait of a Democrap. Isn't it the Repugnicans that are all about enriching the already wealthy and thus would be against giving something away that could alternatively be sold?
Not sure what the enrollment was when I was there, it was 3,200 in 2008, so I'll guess 2,200 in 1989 when I graduated high school. My group of friends and I had thrown down against the blacks in jr high (middle school now), more for fun than some race war. It was latinos vs blacks. So we all knew each other... Nobody picked on anyone, it wasn't that it was a tinder-box or anything more that everyone had an alignment and there was cross-over people in the groups. Our dealers (small time kids) were part of the cross-over group. The popular kids (who were they?), the smart kids, the jocks, the bangers, the stoners, the normals, the goths, all kept to themselves in their self-designated areas. So, nothing big ever happened. The only ones that got picked on to any noticeable extent were the two gay boys and even then it never escalated to violence. I guess it is easier to hide social awkwardness by putting a nice thick coating of cool slightly criminal element over it. Dressing up your geekiness in "look what I'm reading", probably not a good way to go;-). I don't even know what cool kids are nowadays, are they the VPs where I work?
So kids like you actually existed? I read all kinds of shit but never got picked on for it probably because I wasn't stupid enough to interact with the "popular" kids and stoners don't give a shit what you are reading.
It is exactly within his purview to direct members and staff which are under the executive branch in how to behave in specific situations. With the obstructionist morons he was always running into, this was all he could do. And just to be clear, it is specifically, exactly and well within his roles and responsibilities to do so.
Since you are clearly anti-Obama and think he invented executive orders, here is an excerpt for you on their modern history and use from the same wikipedia page: First column, is the president in question (*president in dRumpFt's case), second column is the number issued by that president, last column is the number E.O. that president started at (what numbered ones existed before their term). Gerald R. Ford 169 11798 Jimmy Carter 320 11967 Ronald Reagan 381 12287 George H. W. Bush 166 12668 Bill Clinton [16] 308 12834 George W. Bush [16] 291 13198 Barack Obama [16] 276 13489 Donald Trump (as of September 29, 2017) [16] [17] 49 13765
Mainly because people have more important things they're concerned about like: good quality jobs, single-payer health care, education, net-neutrality, etc. Of all the things that people can get worked up about, this is probably the issue that is least important and relevant.
I make do with the top three, don't need or want or have any use for the others. I am starting to become a little bored with netflix but I share the account with two other households and don't want to leave them high and dry.
My argument against what you are saying is already captured in the Time article I linked, I don't feel that further discussion is warranted, you penguin. And yes, he has done tyrannical things. Enjoy your blissful existence.
Article pasted here for posterity in case linked version disappears:
Donald Trump, president and chief executive of Trump Organization Inc. and 2016 Republican presidential candidate, smiles while speaking during a news conference at the Mar-A-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Fla., on March 15, 2016. Donald Trump, president and chief executive of Trump Organization Inc. and 2016 Republican presidential candidate, smiles while speaking during a news conference at the Mar-A-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Fla., on March 15, 2016. Bloomberg via Getty Images History This Is What Ancient Greeks Would Have Called Donald Trump Devin Singh Mar 18, 2016 Ideas Devin Singh is Assistant Professor of Religion at Dartmouth College and is a Public Voices Fellow with the OpEd Project.
Is Donald Trump a tyrant?
This is not a question of character. It’s even less a matter of likability. Rather it goes to the heart of who we are and who we want to be: Does the Donald pose a fundamental threat to American democracy?
The ancient Greeks thought long and hard about such issues. While we’ve come to associate the word tyrant with someone of foul temperament who abuses power—all traits with which Trump has been linked—Greece had a fairly technical definition. Though coming in many forms, the tyrannos is a figure who, usually through great personal wealth, circumvents established political processes to attain power. Often an outsider or one of the wealthy elite, the tyrant flouts conventions of discourse and forums for debate. The tyrant ignores traditions of deliberation and steamrolls opposition. Ultimately, a tyrant rises to power in ways that undermine democratic structures, leaving the ruler unaccountable to those ruled or to the checks and balances of the system.
Centuries later, on another continent, these ideas still matter. It’s from such thinkers that we derive the political concepts that undergird our democracy. The ancient Greeks understood what qualities might destroy the democratic model they developed and that we’ve inherited. Related US-POLITICS-TRUMP politics Charles J. Sykes: Where the Right Went Wrong
Central among these tyrannical characteristics is a voracious pursuit of wealth with no attendant commitment to public service. For Aristotle in his Politics, money serves as a tyrant’s ultimate means and ends. He cautioned that the tyrant, while claiming to care for the public good, will use the city’s treasury for personal enrichment. Even a tyrant’s gift for rhetoric, and use of flattery and insult, is calculated to provide access to more wealth.
The classical tyrants tended to be notoriously big spenders and conspicuous consumers. They often undertook massive building projects, erecting structures as monuments to their name, trying to increase their notoriety. As Thucydides was forced to acknowledge of tyrants: “They adorn the city beautifully.”
So important is money to tyrants' aims that they may exaggerate their wealth to gain support. Thus, in Aristophanes’ satirical play, The Wasps, a would-be tyrant’s net worth comes under scrutiny. His opponents attempt to set him straight by reminding him that he’s not as wealthy as he claims and that his aspirations are misguided.
The tyrant also typically capitalizes on popular unrest and dissatisfaction, and mobilizes the people, often violently, against the political elite. Yet because the tyrant comes to power outside the conventions of democracy designed to curb power, and has demonstrated contempt of ideals like rational debate and discourse, he is left unaccountable. He ends up betraying the people who helped install him.
I agree with what you're saying. I must be deeply misunderstanding your sig, which is what I responding to there. Oh! you're saying it is 99% likely to be true news, not fake. I thought you were saying it was 99% likely he was correct in calling it fake news.
The article to me says, if it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck... They are making the argument by induction that the unhealthy obese moronic orangutan *president is a tyrant. If you choose to not make the connection then I guess you're going to need yet another trait checked. For me, enough are in place, clearly your standard of proof is higher. Then again I always loathed that guy, well not really during the TV show, I liked the show. Since learning more about what a vile creature he and his family are I have come to much firmer and better informed beliefs about the mendacious orange occupier of the White House. If you on the other hand like him, clearly it will take much more evidence to see that he is indeed a tyrant, though I'd grant he hasn't fully reached his goals.
P.S. If a person exhibits enough traits of a psychopath, that person is a psychopath. If a person exhibits 3 or more symptoms of metabolic syndrome, that person has metabolic syndrome. In my mind, drumPft has passed the tyrant threshold, in yours he hasn't. You are free to continue with your opinion, wrong as it may be;-).
You didn't read the article led to by the link I so carefully pasted in? Are you proposing that the orange tyrant literally has to declare himself king before you'll agree that tyranny is upon us? I sure hope we don't get there for all our sakes. Especially being that we are such sheep that we'd just bleat about it on the internet while watching "I Love Lucy" reruns.
Yeah, but our whole hemisphere is (excluding poles) experiences a big cloud period lasting anywhere from about 10 to 14 hours daily. We commonly refer to that as night but it might as well be clouds for purposes of discussion. So, we have to deal with supplying power at night, to put up with cloudy days we use storage and the tremendously distributed capability that home solar power capturing gives (surely not all the US will be under cloud cover most of the time). The system would be very flexible and resilient indeed if surges and drops could be handled gracefully.
Heavy footprint? Solar is installed where there are already roofs, usually. What ends up happening is that we have millions of little generating stations, the tricky part is connecting the different grid segments. A lot of that already exists though, which is why Enron was able to so easily rape Californians with "demand based" electricity pricing a 15 years or so back.
We had that same 8 weeks of overcast in Oklahoma. It was kind of depressing for a while there, like living in a sunless world or under a wet blanket. Though interestingly, it took me a while to notice that I hadn't seen the sun in some time.
It's funny how people post stuff they don't understand. You'd think they'd know better and if unsure would go AC to protect their "reputation" if nothing else.
Slashdot Mirror
The fat one with daddy issues.
This is what I would do and we would probably instead prefer to own a partial interest in 5 to 10 cars, one of them a pickup for the odd times we need one of those. I'd want to share ownership with people who use the cars at night, or during the workday, the times when I have no need of them.
I don't get why this would be the trait of a Democrap. Isn't it the Repugnicans that are all about enriching the already wealthy and thus would be against giving something away that could alternatively be sold?
No. I'm happy with my non-blade legs and feet. Is he really better off than you?
Not sure what the enrollment was when I was there, it was 3,200 in 2008, so I'll guess 2,200 in 1989 when I graduated high school. My group of friends and I had thrown down against the blacks in jr high (middle school now), more for fun than some race war. It was latinos vs blacks. So we all knew each other... Nobody picked on anyone, it wasn't that it was a tinder-box or anything more that everyone had an alignment and there was cross-over people in the groups. Our dealers (small time kids) were part of the cross-over group. The popular kids (who were they?), the smart kids, the jocks, the bangers, the stoners, the normals, the goths, all kept to themselves in their self-designated areas. So, nothing big ever happened. The only ones that got picked on to any noticeable extent were the two gay boys and even then it never escalated to violence. ;-). I don't even know what cool kids are nowadays, are they the VPs where I work?
I guess it is easier to hide social awkwardness by putting a nice thick coating of cool slightly criminal element over it. Dressing up your geekiness in "look what I'm reading", probably not a good way to go
So kids like you actually existed? I read all kinds of shit but never got picked on for it probably because I wasn't stupid enough to interact with the "popular" kids and stoners don't give a shit what you are reading.
Feel better snowflake?
Read up on "Executive Orders" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It is exactly within his purview to direct members and staff which are under the executive branch in how to behave in specific situations. With the obstructionist morons he was always running into, this was all he could do. And just to be clear, it is specifically, exactly and well within his roles and responsibilities to do so.
Since you are clearly anti-Obama and think he invented executive orders, here is an excerpt for you on their modern history and use from the same wikipedia page:
First column, is the president in question (*president in dRumpFt's case),
second column is the number issued by that president,
last column is the number E.O. that president started at (what numbered ones existed before their term).
Gerald R. Ford 169 11798
Jimmy Carter 320 11967
Ronald Reagan 381 12287
George H. W. Bush 166 12668
Bill Clinton [16] 308 12834
George W. Bush [16] 291 13198
Barack Obama [16] 276 13489
Donald Trump (as of September 29, 2017) [16] [17] 49 13765
Mainly because people have more important things they're concerned about like: good quality jobs, single-payer health care, education, net-neutrality, etc. Of all the things that people can get worked up about, this is probably the issue that is least important and relevant.
I make do with the top three, don't need or want or have any use for the others. I am starting to become a little bored with netflix but I share the account with two other households and don't want to leave them high and dry.
My argument against what you are saying is already captured in the Time article I linked, I don't feel that further discussion is warranted, you penguin.
And yes, he has done tyrannical things.
Enjoy your blissful existence.
Article pasted here for posterity in case linked version disappears:
Donald Trump, president and chief executive of Trump Organization Inc. and 2016 Republican presidential candidate, smiles while speaking during a news conference at the Mar-A-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Fla., on March 15, 2016.
Donald Trump, president and chief executive of Trump Organization Inc. and 2016 Republican presidential candidate, smiles while speaking during a news conference at the Mar-A-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Fla., on March 15, 2016. Bloomberg via Getty Images
History
This Is What Ancient Greeks Would Have Called Donald Trump
Devin Singh
Mar 18, 2016
Ideas
Devin Singh is Assistant Professor of Religion at Dartmouth College and is a Public Voices Fellow with the OpEd Project.
Is Donald Trump a tyrant?
This is not a question of character. It’s even less a matter of likability. Rather it goes to the heart of who we are and who we want to be: Does the Donald pose a fundamental threat to American democracy?
The ancient Greeks thought long and hard about such issues. While we’ve come to associate the word tyrant with someone of foul temperament who abuses power—all traits with which Trump has been linked—Greece had a fairly technical definition. Though coming in many forms, the tyrannos is a figure who, usually through great personal wealth, circumvents established political processes to attain power. Often an outsider or one of the wealthy elite, the tyrant flouts conventions of discourse and forums for debate. The tyrant ignores traditions of deliberation and steamrolls opposition. Ultimately, a tyrant rises to power in ways that undermine democratic structures, leaving the ruler unaccountable to those ruled or to the checks and balances of the system.
Centuries later, on another continent, these ideas still matter. It’s from such thinkers that we derive the political concepts that undergird our democracy. The ancient Greeks understood what qualities might destroy the democratic model they developed and that we’ve inherited.
Related
US-POLITICS-TRUMP
politics
Charles J. Sykes: Where the Right Went Wrong
Central among these tyrannical characteristics is a voracious pursuit of wealth with no attendant commitment to public service. For Aristotle in his Politics, money serves as a tyrant’s ultimate means and ends. He cautioned that the tyrant, while claiming to care for the public good, will use the city’s treasury for personal enrichment. Even a tyrant’s gift for rhetoric, and use of flattery and insult, is calculated to provide access to more wealth.
The classical tyrants tended to be notoriously big spenders and conspicuous consumers. They often undertook massive building projects, erecting structures as monuments to their name, trying to increase their notoriety. As Thucydides was forced to acknowledge of tyrants: “They adorn the city beautifully.”
So important is money to tyrants' aims that they may exaggerate their wealth to gain support. Thus, in Aristophanes’ satirical play, The Wasps, a would-be tyrant’s net worth comes under scrutiny. His opponents attempt to set him straight by reminding him that he’s not as wealthy as he claims and that his aspirations are misguided.
The tyrant also typically capitalizes on popular unrest and dissatisfaction, and mobilizes the people, often violently, against the political elite. Yet because the tyrant comes to power outside the conventions of democracy designed to curb power, and has demonstrated contempt of ideals like rational debate and discourse, he is left unaccountable. He ends up betraying the people who helped install him.
Anything sound familiar?
To be sure, the tyrant label onl
Wouldn't that make her exactly like dRumpfT, therefore correct? Wassamater you? Youse don't support our *president?
You didn't catch that this was an on-demand just-in-time custom route? This is nothing like a bus, much more like a very optimized taxi.
I agree with what you're saying.
I must be deeply misunderstanding your sig, which is what I responding to there. Oh! you're saying it is 99% likely to be true news, not fake. I thought you were saying it was 99% likely he was correct in calling it fake news.
Agreed, that's why I put it in quotations.
btw
If dRumpF says fake news, he thinks it makes him look bad and is in denial. It is probably also not fake.
fuck you
The article to me says, if it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck... They are making the argument by induction that the unhealthy obese moronic orangutan *president is a tyrant. If you choose to not make the connection then I guess you're going to need yet another trait checked. For me, enough are in place, clearly your standard of proof is higher. Then again I always loathed that guy, well not really during the TV show, I liked the show. Since learning more about what a vile creature he and his family are I have come to much firmer and better informed beliefs about the mendacious orange occupier of the White House. If you on the other hand like him, clearly it will take much more evidence to see that he is indeed a tyrant, though I'd grant he hasn't fully reached his goals.
P.S. If a person exhibits enough traits of a psychopath, that person is a psychopath. If a person exhibits 3 or more symptoms of metabolic syndrome, that person has metabolic syndrome. In my mind, drumPft has passed the tyrant threshold, in yours he hasn't. You are free to continue with your opinion, wrong as it may be ;-).
You didn't read the article led to by the link I so carefully pasted in? Are you proposing that the orange tyrant literally has to declare himself king before you'll agree that tyranny is upon us? I sure hope we don't get there for all our sakes. Especially being that we are such sheep that we'd just bleat about it on the internet while watching "I Love Lucy" reruns.
Still tyrannical.
http://time.com/4261816/trump-...
Yeah, but our whole hemisphere is (excluding poles) experiences a big cloud period lasting anywhere from about 10 to 14 hours daily. We commonly refer to that as night but it might as well be clouds for purposes of discussion. So, we have to deal with supplying power at night, to put up with cloudy days we use storage and the tremendously distributed capability that home solar power capturing gives (surely not all the US will be under cloud cover most of the time). The system would be very flexible and resilient indeed if surges and drops could be handled gracefully.
Look at his sig.
He must be making lots of money.
storage
Heavy footprint? Solar is installed where there are already roofs, usually. What ends up happening is that we have millions of little generating stations, the tricky part is connecting the different grid segments. A lot of that already exists though, which is why Enron was able to so easily rape Californians with "demand based" electricity pricing a 15 years or so back.
We had that same 8 weeks of overcast in Oklahoma. It was kind of depressing for a while there, like living in a sunless world or under a wet blanket. Though interestingly, it took me a while to notice that I hadn't seen the sun in some time.
It's funny how people post stuff they don't understand. You'd think they'd know better and if unsure would go AC to protect their "reputation" if nothing else.