If you followed the links, I'm showing that the original intent you cite has been subsequently corrupted. If you think the Senators are representing the people ahead of their parties and the oligarchs, I submit that you may have been inattentive.
. ..planted the seeds that have bloomed, revealing what is tantamount to aristocracy.
1. The Big Senate no longer represents the people meaningfully.
2. The Little House no longer represents the 50 States United, or offers any thoughtful feedback to the Big Senate.
3. The federal government has eminent domain over your wallet.
4. DC is printing money at will, demolishing the value of what you think is in your wallet, and obstructing reform.
5. We're all modern monetary theorists now.
So shut up, peasants, and avert your gaze when your Progressive Overlords pass by.
We speak of a group that is all about power. The labels: "Liberal"; "Progressive"; "Communist"; "Fascist" swirl about to keep the water muddy.
Watch what is done with power, and money. The gubernatorial race in Virginia was bought with a river of advertising bile.
Managing 'useful' when the idea of the signal-to-noise ratio is so subjective cuts to the bone of the problem.
Wikipedia is the start, not the end, of a research effort.
Now, how are we to pronounce a fatwah against the Tea Party in the presence of lucid arguments like that?
Get back to the shrill, hormonally-driven stuff, please.
Please explain why, if there are that many loose customers about, that a different business model is impossible.
There may be reasons, for example, ludicrous regulatory overhead.
"If only there were some. ..natural mechanism by which to explain variations in global temperature.
It would have to be massive, though. On the scale of our own Sun."
The idea that, just because I find the "Anthropogenic Global Climate Warming Change" club is tantamount to a religious cult armed with a computer model means that
I am automatically contending that "climate is constant", is more than a little silly. The idea of nature conservation is as conservative as conservare.
If the last decade of ManBearPiggery has taught anything, it is the imperative to reject categorically all appeals to guilt & fear. Make the argument, put the raw data and the model out there for calm reflection, or understand that you've completely undercut your point.
Slashdot Mirror
I used the term Progressive specifically to avoid the false Demmican/Republocrat dichotomy. What is your criticism, then?
In fact, I kinda linked the 17th Amendment there.
If you followed the links, I'm showing that the original intent you cite has been subsequently corrupted. If you think the Senators are representing the people ahead of their parties and the oligarchs, I submit that you may have been inattentive.
. . .planted the seeds that have bloomed, revealing what is tantamount to aristocracy.
1. The Big Senate no longer represents the people meaningfully.
2. The Little House no longer represents the 50 States United, or offers any thoughtful feedback to the Big Senate.
3. The federal government has eminent domain over your wallet.
4. DC is printing money at will, demolishing the value of what you think is in your wallet, and obstructing reform.
5. We're all modern monetary theorists now.
So shut up, peasants, and avert your gaze when your Progressive Overlords pass by.
We speak of a group that is all about power. The labels: "Liberal"; "Progressive"; "Communist"; "Fascist" swirl about to keep the water muddy.
Watch what is done with power, and money. The gubernatorial race in Virginia was bought with a river of advertising bile.
Would you call this a case of "LiPo-suction"?
Managing 'useful' when the idea of the signal-to-noise ratio is so subjective cuts to the bone of the problem.
Wikipedia is the start, not the end, of a research effort.
It was also created to boost chip and disk sales, too.
And frameworks. Don't forget frameworks.
Would "Affordable Timecare Act" excite you more?
Can't fault the beat, though.
Just the thing when you need to move a 30' smurf.
http://www.sadtrombone.com/
The fundamental problem is the illiterate SecDef.
. . .is after Bezos completes his government takeover, and, a la ObamaCare, starts taxing you for NOT shopping Amazon.
Sorry if the pedal/peddle pun eluded you.
More importantly, if companies don't launder the money through the CEO, how will the the bicycle of political influence be pedaled?
Now, how are we to pronounce a fatwah against the Tea Party in the presence of lucid arguments like that?
Get back to the shrill, hormonally-driven stuff, please.
Please explain why, if there are that many loose customers about, that a different business model is impossible.
There may be reasons, for example, ludicrous regulatory overhead.
Well, Noah, better get back on that there ark project, then.
Recalls Ace of Spades:
"If only there were some. . .natural mechanism by which to explain variations in global temperature.
It would have to be massive, though. On the scale of our own Sun."
The idea that, just because I find the "Anthropogenic Global Climate Warming Change" club is tantamount to a religious cult armed with a computer model means that
I am automatically contending that "climate is constant", is more than a little silly. The idea of nature conservation is as conservative as conservare.
If the last decade of ManBearPiggery has taught anything, it is the imperative to reject categorically all appeals to guilt & fear. Make the argument, put the raw data and the model out there for calm reflection, or understand that you've completely undercut your point.
No problems with the proportions in that statement.
Will devour you all.
Your rejoinder added nothing to this 'oral' history, alas.
It sounds as though you may be one of those awful 9th/10th Amendment revanchists.
Because #Progress