Yes a nation of immigrants who assimilated into the "melting pot", immigrants who learned the local language and accepted the laws of the land and worked to improve the overall society. Not a "salad bowl" as others have started saying where immigrants form their own internal communities, demand recognition of their "laws", refuse to even learn to speak the local language.
You mean your language and your culture. They should become more like you, so you don't have to deal with people different from yourself or adjust in any way.
Did the European explorers and settlers learn the local language and customs when they arrived in the "New World"? No, they took over. Now you are concerned that someone else will do to you what your ancestors did to the people who lived here when they showed up. Ironically, You are actually worried that these new immigrants are just like you.
We're told this mantra over and over again and are expected to accept it unquestionably. Why?
A great nation is one where people mostly share the same values and work towards them together. Practically diversity results in disunity and conflict.
People different from you can teach you things you didn't know before. Having a diverse population exposes people to various viewpoints and beliefs and perhaps enables them to learn and grow. Even being exposed to things we don't like or disagree with can foster learning and growth, even if it's just identifying what we don't desire. No one population has it all figured out, and no philosophy or belief system has all the answers.
I think you can liken it to genetics. Lack of diversity can lead to undesirable traits being passed down. Adding some fresh and different information to the line mitigates that. I'd argue that society is similar.
This could be actually be useful for security. The facial recognition could be deployed for all departing flights, domestic or international. Cross-referencing it with a Muslim registry could be a great tool to identify likely terrorists. It would be very effective because Muslims are the greatest threat to commit acts of terror on aircraft. Once you identify a Muslim attempting to fly, it's very easy to subject them to enhanced security or detain them. I'm all for measures that would actually prevent terrorism, and this would be a great way to do just that.
A Muslim registry? Would all Muslims be required to register with the government? That seems like a pain in the neck. It would probably be easier if we just required them all to wear a yellow crescent on their lapel.
Perhaps that's what's needed for Joe Common to finally realize how ubiquitous tracking is and why he should care.
Then finally maybe there'll be a push towards everything going HTTPS and websites and apps finally putting some effort to protect the privacy of their users' traffic.
I have little hope that Joe Common will ever care about ubiquitous tracking. They may say they care, but they will not change their actions or habits. Most people just don't have the vision or understanding. However, I have noticed that more and more websites are going to HTTPS. It seems to have been prompted by Edward Snowden's revelations a few years ago; or at least seemed contemporaneous.
Vladimir Putin has installed Donald James TRUMP as a KGB puppet. TRUMP has been brazen enough to flaunt it by marrying Russians. Putin in recent days has decided to have an Etherium like cryptocurrency to take over the Russian Rooble. The next step in the process is likely to be TRUMP issuing a parallel cryptocurrency to replace the dollar and then merge with the Russian cryptocurrency. In this way the Dollar will die for the world currency and Russia will use its cyber warfare/tactics to undermine e-security of the USA and leave America in the dust.
So the 150 million that he made last year mentioned in his leaked returns isn't proof enough? His NBC contract, his leaked 1995 returns? You want to know how his shit smelled this morning?
150 million is pretty far from multi-billionaire. I know he's rich, no one is disputing that. The question is how rich, which he refuses to disclose. And no, I have no interest in how his shit smells, thanks.
I'm not a fan of AT&T. In fact I don't much like them at all.
But I'm even more skeptical of lawyers and courts and of National Socialist senators like Mr. Franken.
So as much as I hate it, I think I'm going to cheer for AT&T in this case.
This is how Republicans keep getting elected (well, that and gerrymandering). You don't like AT&T, but you'll side with them because you think Al Franken is a "socilaist". Not even that, but a "National Socialist"! He's a State Senator, so I'm not sure how he could be considered national. Ooooh, you meant like the National Socialist German Workers party! Very clever, you sure nailed him with that one. Well played
Broadband internet, cable tv, and cellular service are not essential services. First world problems.
Seems appropriate. The United States is a first-world country, why wouldn't it have first-world problems? And yes, broadband Internet and cell phones are essentials in the modern world; cable TV not so much. Try working a professional job without them. Go ahead, tell the interviewer you don't have a cell phone or Internet in your home and see how they react. Just tell them when you'll be home to receive a call and that the rest of your correspondence will be by mail.
As society increases its capabilities and comes to rely on them, modern technology and equipment become essential for living and participating in society. But I'm guessing you already knew that.
I can't believe people actually attribute strategy to this guy.
You mean despite winning the election, being a multi-billionaire, being a successful TV star, having a gorgeous wife who's also smart, raising well-mannered kids, and having a cohesive, loving family?
He got all of that without having any strategy - is that what you're saying?
Multi billionaire? I'll wait until I see his tax returns. Besides, it doesn't take much to be rich when you're born that way. You think he has a cohesive, loving family? Have you seen the way his wife looks at him? And yes, I'd say he got all that without having any strategy.
"He's more likely to have read John le Carre than John Locke."
And this is the sort of snide bullshit that illustrates why he resonates with voters, but the intelligentsia despises him.
I've heard this before, that people voted for Trump because they felt slighted and disrespected. If that's true, it really doesn't speak well of those voters. They feel disrespected, so they vote in an obvious moron and charlatan? What, do they think they're sticking it to the man? Do they think making such a foolish and petulant choice will somehow gain them more respect? And those of us who could see who he really was are supposed to somehow feel bad about that?
People can certainly be arrogant and condescending, and I'm not going to defend that. But the proper reaction to such behavior is not to say, "You think I'm stupid? I'll show you stupid!"
Trumps tweets are equally bizarre in that they're honest, as far as I can tell. Honest in a "yes, honey, that dress does make you look fat because you're fat" kind of way (socially dysfunctional, but honest). An honest politician is so outside my experience that it's almost hallucinatory.
They're honest from his point of view. But that doesn't mean they're correct, or factual. After all, it's not a lie if you believe it.
We get it, he doesn't fit the exacting perfect image every president before him portrayed.
Exacting perfect image? At this point I'll settle for adequate or passable.
The only difference is that this president doesn't seem to care about trying to portray himself one way or the other. Say all you want about Trump, but one thing is for certain, he doesn't shy away from who he really is.
The President clearly cares about portraying himself as powerful, strong and a winner. But you're right, he doesn't shy away from who he really is. Even when it's in is own best interest to do so.
Somehow I think that when the supercop leaves the world will go back to fighting - and then and only then might they miss the US.
Or they'll realize that the supercop wasn't as essential as everyone thought. It's not good when the most powerful nation on the planet decides to not be part of the process. The rest of the world will move ahead anyway and the US may lose its seat at the table.
1. Trump alienating our allies is headline news lately.
Give the guy some credit. At least he didn't try to give Angela Merkel a backrub.
Ugh, how bad is it that Trump makes me nostalgic for George W Bush? I thought he would go down in history as America's worst President, but then this orange clown showed up.
It doesn't even make any sense. This law would require a guy to enter the women's bathroom to trim his beard, because he happens to have been born female.
Yes, this is what proponents seem to not understand. They want to prevent men in the women's room by making people who look, sound and act like men use the women's room. There is obviously a fundamental misunderstanding of what Transgender means and what the effects of what they are advocating would be.
When you can come up with a simple, quick, easy, and cheap method that works without physical contact to determine if someone really does identify as another gender today with a certainty exceeding 98%, give me a call.
When you come up with a simple, quick and cheap method of checking a person's biological sex before they enter a public bathroom, give me a call. Do I have to whip my dick out in the hallway to prove I can lawfully use a particular bathroom? Will there be stall monitors to make sure I'm not just peeing when I sit on that toilet?
This whole thing is so stupid. You don't and can't provide proof of biological sex before using a bathroom. So what is going on here? How is this in any way enforceable? It just looks like gender hysteria and nothing more.
Have you ever stopped for a moment to consider why the suicide rate on post-op transsexuals is so high?
Have you? Maybe it's because they are already in a vulnerable position, being so different from those around them and what is considered "normal", and then have to contend with bullying and social isolation as well half-wits who say they are sick and need therapy.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes a nation of immigrants who assimilated into the "melting pot", immigrants who learned the local language and accepted the laws of the land and worked to improve the overall society. Not a "salad bowl" as others have started saying where immigrants form their own internal communities, demand recognition of their "laws", refuse to even learn to speak the local language.
You mean your language and your culture. They should become more like you, so you don't have to deal with people different from yourself or adjust in any way.
Did the European explorers and settlers learn the local language and customs when they arrived in the "New World"? No, they took over. Now you are concerned that someone else will do to you what your ancestors did to the people who lived here when they showed up. Ironically, You are actually worried that these new immigrants are just like you.
We're told this mantra over and over again and are expected to accept it unquestionably. Why?
A great nation is one where people mostly share the same values and work towards them together. Practically diversity results in disunity and conflict.
People different from you can teach you things you didn't know before. Having a diverse population exposes people to various viewpoints and beliefs and perhaps enables them to learn and grow. Even being exposed to things we don't like or disagree with can foster learning and growth, even if it's just identifying what we don't desire. No one population has it all figured out, and no philosophy or belief system has all the answers.
I think you can liken it to genetics. Lack of diversity can lead to undesirable traits being passed down. Adding some fresh and different information to the line mitigates that. I'd argue that society is similar.
This could be actually be useful for security. The facial recognition could be deployed for all departing flights, domestic or international. Cross-referencing it with a Muslim registry could be a great tool to identify likely terrorists. It would be very effective because Muslims are the greatest threat to commit acts of terror on aircraft. Once you identify a Muslim attempting to fly, it's very easy to subject them to enhanced security or detain them. I'm all for measures that would actually prevent terrorism, and this would be a great way to do just that.
A Muslim registry? Would all Muslims be required to register with the government? That seems like a pain in the neck. It would probably be easier if we just required them all to wear a yellow crescent on their lapel.
Perhaps that's what's needed for Joe Common to finally realize how ubiquitous tracking is and why he should care.
Then finally maybe there'll be a push towards everything going HTTPS and websites and apps finally putting some effort to protect the privacy of their users' traffic.
I have little hope that Joe Common will ever care about ubiquitous tracking. They may say they care, but they will not change their actions or habits. Most people just don't have the vision or understanding. However, I have noticed that more and more websites are going to HTTPS. It seems to have been prompted by Edward Snowden's revelations a few years ago; or at least seemed contemporaneous.
They provide the best service for the lowest price.
Perhaps, but they to that by operating at a loss. Uber is not sustainable in their current form.
Meh, fair enough.
What kind of fool do you take us for?
LOL, you really want to know?
Vladimir Putin has installed Donald James TRUMP as a KGB puppet. TRUMP has been brazen enough to flaunt it by marrying Russians. Putin in recent days has decided to have an Etherium like cryptocurrency to take over the Russian Rooble. The next step in the process is likely to be TRUMP issuing a parallel cryptocurrency to replace the dollar and then merge with the Russian cryptocurrency. In this way the Dollar will die for the world currency and Russia will use its cyber warfare/tactics to undermine e-security of the USA and leave America in the dust.
Rooble? Seriously?
You're a Russian Rooble.
So the 150 million that he made last year mentioned in his leaked returns isn't proof enough? His NBC contract, his leaked 1995 returns? You want to know how his shit smelled this morning?
150 million is pretty far from multi-billionaire. I know he's rich, no one is disputing that. The question is how rich, which he refuses to disclose. And no, I have no interest in how his shit smells, thanks.
I'm not a fan of AT&T. In fact I don't much like them at all.
But I'm even more skeptical of lawyers and courts and of National Socialist senators like Mr. Franken.
So as much as I hate it, I think I'm going to cheer for AT&T in this case.
This is how Republicans keep getting elected (well, that and gerrymandering). You don't like AT&T, but you'll side with them because you think Al Franken is a "socilaist". Not even that, but a "National Socialist"! He's a State Senator, so I'm not sure how he could be considered national. Ooooh, you meant like the National Socialist German Workers party! Very clever, you sure nailed him with that one. Well played
Broadband internet, cable tv, and cellular service are not essential services. First world problems.
Seems appropriate. The United States is a first-world country, why wouldn't it have first-world problems? And yes, broadband Internet and cell phones are essentials in the modern world; cable TV not so much. Try working a professional job without them. Go ahead, tell the interviewer you don't have a cell phone or Internet in your home and see how they react. Just tell them when you'll be home to receive a call and that the rest of your correspondence will be by mail.
As society increases its capabilities and comes to rely on them, modern technology and equipment become essential for living and participating in society. But I'm guessing you already knew that.
I can't believe people actually attribute strategy to this guy.
You mean despite winning the election, being a multi-billionaire, being a successful TV star, having a gorgeous wife who's also smart, raising well-mannered kids, and having a cohesive, loving family?
He got all of that without having any strategy - is that what you're saying?
Multi billionaire? I'll wait until I see his tax returns. Besides, it doesn't take much to be rich when you're born that way. You think he has a cohesive, loving family? Have you seen the way his wife looks at him? And yes, I'd say he got all that without having any strategy.
Who killed Seth Rich? There is some serious Obstruction of Justice going on, but it ain't the one you're freaking out about.
Come on, man. Even Fox News isn't fucking that chicken anymore.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/business/media/fox-news-seth-rich.html
Put down the Hannity; it's bad for ya.
Are you a Trump supporter or are you making fun of Trump supporters?
Poe's Law gets more true every day.
I wouldn't say "being used against him" is really happening- I think that's just a leftwing belief point, not real news.
How about can and will be used against him?
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/336337-lawyer-challenging-travel-ban-we-dont-need-the-help-from-trump-but-will-take
"He's more likely to have read John le Carre than John Locke." And this is the sort of snide bullshit that illustrates why he resonates with voters, but the intelligentsia despises him.
I've heard this before, that people voted for Trump because they felt slighted and disrespected. If that's true, it really doesn't speak well of those voters. They feel disrespected, so they vote in an obvious moron and charlatan? What, do they think they're sticking it to the man? Do they think making such a foolish and petulant choice will somehow gain them more respect? And those of us who could see who he really was are supposed to somehow feel bad about that?
People can certainly be arrogant and condescending, and I'm not going to defend that. But the proper reaction to such behavior is not to say, "You think I'm stupid? I'll show you stupid!"
Trumps tweets are equally bizarre in that they're honest, as far as I can tell. Honest in a "yes, honey, that dress does make you look fat because you're fat" kind of way (socially dysfunctional, but honest). An honest politician is so outside my experience that it's almost hallucinatory.
They're honest from his point of view. But that doesn't mean they're correct, or factual. After all, it's not a lie if you believe it.
The US is really fucked. Sorry.
Yeah, most of us are sorry too.
We get it, he doesn't fit the exacting perfect image every president before him portrayed.
Exacting perfect image? At this point I'll settle for adequate or passable.
The only difference is that this president doesn't seem to care about trying to portray himself one way or the other. Say all you want about Trump, but one thing is for certain, he doesn't shy away from who he really is.
The President clearly cares about portraying himself as powerful, strong and a winner. But you're right, he doesn't shy away from who he really is. Even when it's in is own best interest to do so.
Somehow I think that when the supercop leaves the world will go back to fighting - and then and only then might they miss the US.
Or they'll realize that the supercop wasn't as essential as everyone thought. It's not good when the most powerful nation on the planet decides to not be part of the process. The rest of the world will move ahead anyway and the US may lose its seat at the table.
1. Trump alienating our allies is headline news lately.
Give the guy some credit. At least he didn't try to give Angela Merkel a backrub.
Ugh, how bad is it that Trump makes me nostalgic for George W Bush? I thought he would go down in history as America's worst President, but then this orange clown showed up.
Why the fuck aren't you worried about children?
Because children are largely just fine and not in as much danger as some people imagine.
It doesn't even make any sense. This law would require a guy to enter the women's bathroom to trim his beard, because he happens to have been born female.
Yes, this is what proponents seem to not understand. They want to prevent men in the women's room by making people who look, sound and act like men use the women's room. There is obviously a fundamental misunderstanding of what Transgender means and what the effects of what they are advocating would be.
When you can come up with a simple, quick, easy, and cheap method that works without physical contact to determine if someone really does identify as another gender today with a certainty exceeding 98%, give me a call.
When you come up with a simple, quick and cheap method of checking a person's biological sex before they enter a public bathroom, give me a call. Do I have to whip my dick out in the hallway to prove I can lawfully use a particular bathroom? Will there be stall monitors to make sure I'm not just peeing when I sit on that toilet?
This whole thing is so stupid. You don't and can't provide proof of biological sex before using a bathroom. So what is going on here? How is this in any way enforceable? It just looks like gender hysteria and nothing more.
Have you ever stopped for a moment to consider why the suicide rate on post-op transsexuals is so high?
Have you? Maybe it's because they are already in a vulnerable position, being so different from those around them and what is considered "normal", and then have to contend with bullying and social isolation as well half-wits who say they are sick and need therapy.