Kathleen Sebelius was put in a politically impossible position. There was zero possibility of the technology supporting the ACA ever working as originally specced. She should have recognized this instantly, but even if she did, what could she have done?
Quit.
I'm sure she's in a financial position where she didn't have to have the income, and if she had any integrity, she would walk. Further, when questioned by the press, she wouldn't give the 'spend more time with my family' canned response, she would be truthful.
She wasn't placed in a position. She sought out the position. As do all politicians.
So the correct answer to this question was the one ESR asked - for who and for what?
That's why I asked him to specify criteria when he answered. IMNSHO, the answer is almost entirely dependent on the criteria, as evidenced by the poster above who mentioned the FNFAL, etc.
I thought the whole system was based on the fact that most of the individuals with bitcoin holdings were criminals, so that stealing anything would get you killed.
Fair enough that Atkins wasn't killed by his diet, still, fact: he died young.
Seventy-two isn't young. It's rather close to the life expectancy in the US, IIRC. And more to the point: it doesn't fucking matter if he died young, considering his death had zero relation to his diet.
Oh, I read it carefully enough. The goal of feminism is to provide equality to women in society, and this includes distributing the responsibility of child-rearing to both genders.
Then why do most feminist groups object to presumed shared parenting scenarios in divorce situations?
I'm just going to imagine that you mean that the guys are big fat slobs with saggy manmaries, and Angelina is a fit young woman with perky breasts. Yes that's it.
That's part of it, but it was also a shitty, obnoxious 'joke' about Jolie's preventive double mastectomy.
Whether they have a place on the modern battlefield is equal to the question of whether infantry has a place on the modern battlefield. If they do, then having a mobile infantry is an advantage.
Same 'joke' (truth in my case) was the AC first post, just a little above this one. While funny, it is redundant. (FWIW, when I mod, I wouldn't waste a point on a redundant mod there. It's not spammy, it's not a post trying to avoid a down moderation elsewhere in a discussion. It's just someone a little slow on the trigger. But I guess spergs get mod points also.)
And why did you mention looks when OP specifically mentioned the sum of personality traits. In your attempt at white knighting, you actually come across as more obnoxious than the post you reply to.
The funny thing is that I don't necessarily disagree with him either. And yeah, that post indicates he may be the poster child for the type of person of whom I'm speaking .
While that's a nice ideal, you are speaking of a group of people who lose their minds over trivial shit like what brand of phone someone bought. Or that someone else may find a tablet useful/desirable. These are not people with the slightest bit of social grace.
Slashdot Mirror
"Providing aid and comfort to enemies" can be interpreted pretty damned broadly.
Stan Lee is a douche who ripped off more than his fair share of writers and artists. You'd make a stronger point if you cited Steve Ditko.
No offense to you or your coworker, but is there any reason to accept your theory just on your say so?
(And your sig is accurate, btw)
Kathleen Sebelius was put in a politically impossible position. There was zero possibility of the technology supporting the ACA ever working as originally specced. She should have recognized this instantly, but even if she did, what could she have done?
Quit.
I'm sure she's in a financial position where she didn't have to have the income, and if she had any integrity, she would walk. Further, when questioned by the press, she wouldn't give the 'spend more time with my family' canned response, she would be truthful.
She wasn't placed in a position. She sought out the position. As do all politicians.
'cuz he's a MAVERICK!
He's too busy to learn to computer because he's busy playing with the boys?
So the correct answer to this question was the one ESR asked - for who and for what?
That's why I asked him to specify criteria when he answered. IMNSHO, the answer is almost entirely dependent on the criteria, as evidenced by the poster above who mentioned the FNFAL, etc.
People are attacking libertarians over it because they don't know the difference between anarchist, minarchist, and libertarian.
Because we don't care about that any more than we care about whether you are in the People's Front of Judea or the Judean People's Front.
I thought the whole system was based on the fact that most of the individuals with bitcoin holdings were criminals, so that stealing anything would get you killed.
No, you've confused BTC with USD.
What good is it to live a long time if you can't eat what you like to eat?
The four basic food groups are good enough for me - caffeine, nicotine, bacon, and pussy. Without those, life has very little meaning.
Rinsed down with a good homebrew. Gotta get your B-complex vitamins somewhere.
Fair enough that Atkins wasn't killed by his diet, still, fact: he died young.
Seventy-two isn't young. It's rather close to the life expectancy in the US, IIRC. And more to the point: it doesn't fucking matter if he died young, considering his death had zero relation to his diet.
Which is the better battle rifle, an AK-47/74 type or an AR-15/M-16/M-4 type? Please give your criteria as well as your answer.
Bonus: favorite handgun platform/caliber that isn't a .45 1911.
Oh, I read it carefully enough. The goal of feminism is to provide equality to women in society, and this includes distributing the responsibility of child-rearing to both genders.
Then why do most feminist groups object to presumed shared parenting scenarios in divorce situations?
Your solution to being paid less than male colleagues is to eliminate the male colleagues?
Third wave feminism for you.
Issues, much?
That's exactly what he meant. I know, sarcasm can be hard to detect online.
I feel kinda bad for getting this.
I'm just going to imagine that you mean that the guys are big fat slobs with saggy manmaries, and Angelina is a fit young woman with perky breasts. Yes that's it.
That's part of it, but it was also a shitty, obnoxious 'joke' about Jolie's preventive double mastectomy.
Whether they have a place on the modern battlefield is equal to the question of whether infantry has a place on the modern battlefield. If they do, then having a mobile infantry is an advantage.
Mobile infantry made me the man I am today.
Same 'joke' (truth in my case) was the AC first post, just a little above this one. While funny, it is redundant. (FWIW, when I mod, I wouldn't waste a point on a redundant mod there. It's not spammy, it's not a post trying to avoid a down moderation elsewhere in a discussion. It's just someone a little slow on the trigger. But I guess spergs get mod points also.)
"We'll do it live!"
She's okay, but 'really beautiful'?
And why did you mention looks when OP specifically mentioned the sum of personality traits. In your attempt at white knighting, you actually come across as more obnoxious than the post you reply to.
All these hackers, which one is Angelina Jolie?
The one without boobs.
The funny thing is that I don't necessarily disagree with him either. And yeah, that post indicates he may be the poster child for the type of person of whom I'm speaking .
You're missing the point.
Empty it where?
Push it over the border to France where nobody will notice the smell.
While that's a nice ideal, you are speaking of a group of people who lose their minds over trivial shit like what brand of phone someone bought. Or that someone else may find a tablet useful/desirable. These are not people with the slightest bit of social grace.
And until Hammer pants are back in style, they won't fit in my pocket.