I heard she was a schoolteacher, working for shitty schoolteacher wages and being forced to grade third-rate writing by spoiled little rich girls with rape fantasies.
There's a really old quote that fits here:
"Believe half of what you read, and none of what you hear."
Instead, today's Democrats just want to hand a bunch of no-strings money to corporations to be wasted doing absolutely nothing, which is what both the stimuli did.
It was the "no-strings" part that recalled this particular learning from a couple months ago (from a Ron Paul Youtube video): when President Obama decries legislation as "having earmarks", he is being disingenuous. It is Congress's job to give legislation to the President which is earmarked as to how the money should be spent. If Congress gave the President legislation without earmarks, then the Executive branch can decide how the money allocated to that legislation will be spent. In other words, "give me legislation without earmarks!" is actually directly translated to "give me a blank check!"
A comment from two years ago: "This makes Obama look kinda silly when he says "I don't like that bill because it has earmarks.... remove the earmarks and I'll sign it". Yeeesh."
Exactly: thanks to fractional reserve lending, there aren't enough dollars in existence to satisfy the US government's debt. It is mathematically impossible, and provably so. (Bankers FTW!)
Fourth paragraph, seventh word, is what GP is (incorrectly) referring to. It caused me to double-take as I was reading it because "except" would fit that structure; however, my brain then decided that it was correct as written, and I would have forgotten it had I not seen your response. So I read the hidden intermediate post and saw that foniksonik (573572) is lacking in reading comprehension skills, and seems to be overly blessed with the condescension skill.
The transmission by repetition also fits, although maybe not as obviously, but if people don't pick up the software and use it, does it exist? The transmission by repetitition aspect of software is in running it repetedly.
Interesting! So, the success of a software program might be measured by the total computers it can convince to run it, and the amount of time it runs. (I guess "System Idle Process" is thus the most successful, by that metric.:)
"My party, right or wrong", has become the new "My country, right or wrong".
True, but it's always been "my tribe, right or wrong." Xenophobia has been a useful adaptation at times in our evolution, the evidence appears to show.
You see. You can't even post a basic list of their demands or desires, but have to refer me to websites. All you've done is demonstrate how convoluted they are.
The complexity of a problem dictates the complexity required of the solution. Simpler solutions for complex problems will generally have edge cases of failure. Look up "fractional reserve lending" to get an idea of how the bankers stole from the sovereign countries of Europe by forcing them into a common currency that the countries could not devalue by printing more of. Now, property and resources of those countries are being "foreclosed" on by bankers in other countries, reducing the sovereignty of those nations.
The situation in the US is similar. The last time we had zero national debt was 1835. Not zero deficit, which means that we're bringing in as much as we spend; but zero debt, we owed nothing to anybody. Then the central bankers came in, and in the last 100 years the dollar has lost 98% of its value.
I'm sorry that I cannot articulate much more right now because I have to go to work. The above is the result of my root cause analysis of this issue; there are certainly other causes, but centralized banking and fractional reserve lending are two of the root causes for the situation we're in.
So, when it becomes inconvenient (say, when they wanted to sneak a SOPA piece in), they could modify the rule to allow for exceptions.
Creating two classes of citizens is generally ultimately dangerous for the ones who benefit. It was recently revealed that the political class can use any information they obtain in order to profit personally from, and not fall afoul of insider trading laws. This seems obscene.
Agreed; plus: all elected officials should have audio/video monitoring, 24/7. Sure, some citizens might enjoy watching the sex, some the bathroom; that's the price one pays for electing for public service. Bring back the sword of Damocles!
At the risk of accumulating negative karma, I would say it's more "he got lucky". In the sense that he wasn't killed earlier in his movement, like countless others before him were, in various attempted movements throughout history. Not to take away anything from his accomplishments; he has shown us a narrow path that we can walk successfully. It's very, very narrow, however, sometimes defeatingly so.
Awesome! Thanks to the two who modded my sibling post down; it had the desired effect, parent no longer has a whiny signature. (In fact, at the current moment, parent has no signature.)
The supreme has interpreted away most of the rights enumerated in the constitution [...]
Um... Our rights are not enumerated. (The government's are.) Other than that, I completely agree, and mention FIJA whenever I'm called, which they throw me out for.
Lotsa luck getting those years back. Not to mention the legal costs.
Sounds like perhaps we need a Constitutional amendment to allow anyone to be "injured" by proposed or actual laws, and thus have standing to sue. These days, "needing standing" means having been actively prosecuted using those laws. That system sounds very much like a loophole waiting for abuse, and, wait for it, we've had laws on the books that aren't really available to challenge, due to selective prosecution. ("Only go after the poor", in other words; and, the rich won't want to make themselves targets. Which means my proposed amendment has no chance of getting through, especially considering my signature.)
Slashdot Mirror
I heard she was a schoolteacher, working for shitty schoolteacher wages and being forced to grade third-rate writing by spoiled little rich girls with rape fantasies.
There's a really old quote that fits here: "Believe half of what you read, and none of what you hear."
If this costs me a few bucks in taxes, that's fine because I don't have to worry about the wheels coming off my car now.
Broken window fallacy?
The question is... what to do now? Stagnate while waiting for another massive international conflict?
Invest in the next infrastructure: nanotechnology.
Instead, today's Democrats just want to hand a bunch of no-strings money to corporations to be wasted doing absolutely nothing, which is what both the stimuli did.
It was the "no-strings" part that recalled this particular learning from a couple months ago (from a Ron Paul Youtube video): when President Obama decries legislation as "having earmarks", he is being disingenuous. It is Congress's job to give legislation to the President which is earmarked as to how the money should be spent. If Congress gave the President legislation without earmarks, then the Executive branch can decide how the money allocated to that legislation will be spent. In other words, "give me legislation without earmarks!" is actually directly translated to "give me a blank check!"
A comment from two years ago: "This makes Obama look kinda silly when he says "I don't like that bill because it has earmarks.... remove the earmarks and I'll sign it". Yeeesh."
Exactly: thanks to fractional reserve lending, there aren't enough dollars in existence to satisfy the US government's debt. It is mathematically impossible, and provably so. (Bankers FTW!)
Fourth paragraph, seventh word, is what GP is (incorrectly) referring to. It caused me to double-take as I was reading it because "except" would fit that structure; however, my brain then decided that it was correct as written, and I would have forgotten it had I not seen your response. So I read the hidden intermediate post and saw that foniksonik (573572) is lacking in reading comprehension skills, and seems to be overly blessed with the condescension skill.
Or walk into a movie theatre...
The transmission by repetition also fits, although maybe not as obviously, but if people don't pick up the software and use it, does it exist? The transmission by repetitition aspect of software is in running it repetedly.
Interesting! So, the success of a software program might be measured by the total computers it can convince to run it, and the amount of time it runs. (I guess "System Idle Process" is thus the most successful, by that metric. :)
Although that does level the playing field, it also sounds something like the broken window fallacy.
Whenever you drill you end up with more than one "piece".
Or is it the inner geek who can't see the sight of tossing a 500GB drive away?
Or more likely, the inner somethingelse, who can't see the sight of tossing 500GB of mineable data away?
Yeah, and after a while you're like, "blonde, brunette, redhead"...
It would be nice if someone had something intelligent to say about this.
"...and pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space, 'cause there's bugger all down here on Earth."
Torture is a crime, under the eighth amendment ban of cruel and unusual punishments [...]
Perhaps we have recently used it enough that it no longer fits under the "unusual" doctrine? :(
"My party, right or wrong", has become the new "My country, right or wrong".
True, but it's always been "my tribe, right or wrong." Xenophobia has been a useful adaptation at times in our evolution, the evidence appears to show.
You see. You can't even post a basic list of their demands or desires, but have to refer me to websites. All you've done is demonstrate how convoluted they are.
The complexity of a problem dictates the complexity required of the solution. Simpler solutions for complex problems will generally have edge cases of failure. Look up "fractional reserve lending" to get an idea of how the bankers stole from the sovereign countries of Europe by forcing them into a common currency that the countries could not devalue by printing more of. Now, property and resources of those countries are being "foreclosed" on by bankers in other countries, reducing the sovereignty of those nations.
The situation in the US is similar. The last time we had zero national debt was 1835. Not zero deficit, which means that we're bringing in as much as we spend; but zero debt, we owed nothing to anybody. Then the central bankers came in, and in the last 100 years the dollar has lost 98% of its value.
I'm sorry that I cannot articulate much more right now because I have to go to work. The above is the result of my root cause analysis of this issue; there are certainly other causes, but centralized banking and fractional reserve lending are two of the root causes for the situation we're in.
So, when it becomes inconvenient (say, when they wanted to sneak a SOPA piece in), they could modify the rule to allow for exceptions.
Creating two classes of citizens is generally ultimately dangerous for the ones who benefit. It was recently revealed that the political class can use any information they obtain in order to profit personally from, and not fall afoul of insider trading laws. This seems obscene.
And 3) keep the Bradley Mannings in line. (Never 4) repeal the agencies of the government doing evil work.)
Agreed; plus: all elected officials should have audio/video monitoring, 24/7. Sure, some citizens might enjoy watching the sex, some the bathroom; that's the price one pays for electing for public service. Bring back the sword of Damocles!
At the risk of accumulating negative karma, I would say it's more "he got lucky". In the sense that he wasn't killed earlier in his movement, like countless others before him were, in various attempted movements throughout history. Not to take away anything from his accomplishments; he has shown us a narrow path that we can walk successfully. It's very, very narrow, however, sometimes defeatingly so.
Awesome! Thanks to the two who modded my sibling post down; it had the desired effect, parent no longer has a whiny signature. (In fact, at the current moment, parent has no signature.)
Sounds like you're fueling your cells with anger.
The supreme has interpreted away most of the rights enumerated in the constitution [...]
Um... Our rights are not enumerated. (The government's are.) Other than that, I completely agree, and mention FIJA whenever I'm called, which they throw me out for.
Lotsa luck getting those years back. Not to mention the legal costs.
Sounds like perhaps we need a Constitutional amendment to allow anyone to be "injured" by proposed or actual laws, and thus have standing to sue. These days, "needing standing" means having been actively prosecuted using those laws. That system sounds very much like a loophole waiting for abuse, and, wait for it, we've had laws on the books that aren't really available to challenge, due to selective prosecution. ("Only go after the poor", in other words; and, the rich won't want to make themselves targets. Which means my proposed amendment has no chance of getting through, especially considering my signature.)
It also specifically excludes some known abuses of government, such as ex post facto laws.
How does one defend Clinton's retroactive tax increases?