Calling conservatives who give more to charity than progressives and are far less likely to lie claiming they did when they didn't more selfish is off base.
That old saw? Only by counting donations to churches as "charity", i.e. sophistry. Just because you get to write off your contribution to evangelical stadiums, Mormon castles and Catholic sex abuse settlements off your taxes does not make it charity.
So when Trump makes racist, sexist actual comments many many many times. You find that better than her saying he should not make racist, sexist comments?
Good luck with that deflection, Hillbot. If Trump's actions excuse Hillary's, then the reverse must also be true. So how many of Trump's comments are you going to write off in exchange for Hillary's racism in the 90's - calling minority kids Superpredators that needed to be "brought to heel"?
After the GOP threatened to do so under Bush, despite Bush getting every single thing he wanted (save Clinton's SS privatization and Justice Meyers). And only for non-SCOTUS judicial nominations - dimmerwit.
So WYP, DrunkWumpus? What does that do to change the point that Republicans would jettison the filibuster the nanosecond the Dems insisted they have 60 votes to name a post office?
You are only responsible to yourself (and possibly your family), you don't have to work if you don't want to, but you cannot demand that others work for you and pay for you, feed you, cloth you, shelter you, treat your diseases, educate you, etc.
And your Ranidan hand waiving has changed....nothing. Having a job to avoid destitution is treated as a responsibility, not a choice. Which means if the only available job is driving for Uber....you'll expect people to drive for Uber.
Again, if Uber is the *difference* between Joe Somebody earning money or not earning money, then attacking the *ONLY* company that Joe is apparently capable of finding a work at is ridiculous and economically suicidal.
If you want to keep restating my point with different words, knock yourself out.
The US Navy has hundreds of ships, of which only a few dozen are aircraft carriers and submarines. Since the submarine power plants tend to be in the 50MW to 150MW range then I'd say any surface ship with a power plant of 50MW or larger should be capable of being nuclear powered.
There's two questions here...."can we" and "should we". Nuclear powered reactors have a use case on aircraft carriers, as they are floating cities with immense power needs. For icebreakers, for power, long deployments, and acting as floating power plants for remote sites. Submarines, for obvious reasons.
Not really seeing it for cruisers, though, for a couple of reasons. First, the cost, which happens to be the Achilles heel of civilian nuclear power. For what it would cost to build and maintain a reactor on a cruiser, you could probably pay to have fuel oil shipped to it anywhere in the world, build enough wind and solar farms to make up for any CO2 burned as fuel, and save a nice chunk of money in the process. So if the purpose is to lower overall emissions, why bother.
Second reason is, the U.S. military hasn't faced anyone that can give it a kick in the teeth, or at least a bloody nose, since it got its imperialistic ass kicked out of Vietnam. If Hillary had won the election and tried to enforce her stupid fly zone over Syria, bomb Iran for the weapons program the CIA and Mossad said Iran didn't have, or take the "Asian Pivot" another step and sink a Chinese vessel, we might have a few sunken Navy vessels on our hands.
Aircraft carriers are kept at a distance and are well-defended. If a nuclear sub is sunk, it probably means it just fired off its nuclear missiles and we have much much greater things to worry about than having a mini-Chernobyl in the Persian Gulf. But if a cruiser is sunk because it was swarmed with enough missiles to overwhelm its defenses - you really want that mini-Chernobyl, or several of them? Countries that have been picked as enemies of the United States aren't going to bother trying to outspend the Pentagon's $1+ trillion annual budget, they're just going to get enough missiles together to sink your ships stalking their coastlines.
What you seem to fail to comprehend is that nothing requires this technology to be used only on ships. It can be done in any location where a nuclear power plant can be located and there is access to water.
Try to "comprehend" the cost and risk arguments above. I'm sure the U.S. base in Okinawa uses a good amount of power - but why not simply buy it from Japan's civilian power infrastructure (even nuclear powered). For reasons based both on cost and risk. Let's say some trigger happy commander in Foal Eagle decides to fire some "warning shots" in the annual practice invasion of North Korea. North Korea, deciding its the real deal this time, decides to defend themselves by firing off some ballistic missiles at said Okinawan base. Mini-Chernobyl, again.
Or....Congress could completely gut every single military program and institution outside of the various Guards: Coast, National and Air. It would be more than enough for this nation's actual defense needs. Having a thousand military bases around the world and special forces deployed to 130+ countries has nothing to do with defense and everything to do with empire.
That's just an anti-military rant which has nothing to do with this matter.
It has everything to do with it. The United States shells out at least $1.2 trillion a year on warmonger spending, more than the rest of the world combined. This is wholly and completely unneeded corporate welfare, in service of an American Empire. Nothing more, nothing less
Yes you are. Look at the payouts from class action lawsuits. You get, what $30 bucks back. Meanwhile the lawyers walk away with millions in "fees" cus well fees.
Nah, you're still the useful idiot for regurgitating corporatist propaganda. Because you got that $30 with zero effort or risk on your part, and the company responsible had to pay for their actions that actually affected their quarterly dividends. Don't like it? Then spend thousands to tens of thousands of your own dollars to hire your own lawyer to file your own lawsuit. But be prepared to walk away with nothing but a huge bill from the law firm.
And then, even if you win, isn't going to do dick to change corporate behavior. Guess what will do that, particularly where consumers are nickel and dimmed? Class action lawsuits, that's what.
That'll play out well in rural Appalachia... seriously, if you want to do a higher MW in high-cost areas, feel free to pass it at the local level, but you're talking about economic suicide for rural areas.
Nonsense. Increasing the the minimum wage would be a huge boost to Appalachia, as people who have more money to spend in the local economy. Which.....boosts the local economy.
ope, we've been here before. Most people would rather leave their trash and shit in the street, or dump it secretly rather than pay anything substantial to have it removed.
Randian whackjobs, maybe, but those are a decided minority. But there's one little side effect to taking the majority of wealth created and funneling it not into the hands of the idle rich, but people who work for a living - they wont complain at paying another $5 a month so their garbageman doesn't need food stamps to feed his family.
the point is that nobody at all is forcing anybody to drive for Uber
Except that point is facile in a country where having a job is considered a responsibility, not a choice. If you run into Joe Somebody and driving for Uber is the difference between him having a roof over his head or having to live on public assistance - you'll tell him to stop whining and drive for Uber.
Ok mister alt-left communist sympothiser tell us why a job that will soon be automated is 'deserving' of a 'living wage'. I'm dying to hear an explanation that doesn't involve 'because its the right thing to do'.
And when it's your industry made obsolete and you can't find another job, are you going to go dig your own grave and quietly lie in it - or did you not think that talking point through before vomiting it onto your keyboard?
Only if you've found some magical filter that hides all posts from gun nuts, Randians, nativists and American Exceptionalists. How often do you load a 400 comment story and wonder why you don't see any posts?
A very simple yet effective way to detect half-educated retards spewing retarded bullshit is to check for abnormal capitalization in common nouns. Congratulations, you qualified!
That's nice - now where's your counter-argument to what he actually said? Otherwise all you have is an ad hom with high amounts of spittle - which means the only 'retarded bullshit spewer' is you.
There's always another option. It might not be a great one. Or the one you want, but there's always another option.
How so - has your area passed a universal income to go together with universal housing, health care and secondary education? If not, it's a farce to call taking the best job you can find (no matter how shitty) a "choice" when it's really a requirement.
The revolution led directly to famine, from destruction of the economy, and genocide during the Reign of Terror. So yes, I'd say that Marie Antoinette's political behavior was "not doing anything wrong".
Whenever it's the rich and the bourgeois taking it up the ass, rather than the poor, the fainting couches are whipped out and hands get chapped from frantic wringing. Doesn't matter if the people's revolution is in France, Russia, or Cuba.
"There were two 'Reigns of Terror', if we could but remember and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passions, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon a thousand persons, the other upon a hundred million; but our shudders are all for the "horrors of the... momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty and heartbreak? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief terror that we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror - that unspeakable bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves."
Mark Twain, writing about the French Revolution, in A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
Stop watching Fox and your IQ will go up 30 points within a week.
Then if someone is in the country for a decade, stays of trouble, doesn't try to use welfare, learns English and civics, just offer them and their minor kids citizenship. Chances are they will keep doing what they are doing, which is good for the country. No automatic birth citizenship.
More like....a green card handed to anyone who crosses the Mexican border, no questions asked, with a short path to full citizenship. Very short. Because there isn't a single country south of the border that hasn't been fucked over by the United States. Over and over and over and over and over and over again. Real justice would mean increasing your taxes to pay trillions in restitution to every country from Mexico to Chile, and extraditing every living president and official from the CIA (and it's PR wing, the State Department) to face multiple lifetime sentences in prison.
So STFU and let Jorge cross the border, since his parents were murdered by a Reagan-backed death squad. Let Miguel work at a car wash, as you bankrupted his family farm with NAFTA and then turned his province into a war zone with your war on poor drug users. Margarita fled the U.S. backed junta in Honduras, so let her graduate from a goddamned public high school.
Don't like it - write your congressman to demand that taxes be raised through the stratosphere, and that Obama book a one-way flight from the White House on Jan 20 to a docket in Honduras, just for starters.
I guessed you are a Muslim. That accounts for your disgusting anti-Semitism before.
Wow, the shell finally fell off the nut. Nobody's said anything about Jews in this thread, slick - you drunk? Not just drunk, but black-out drunk?
But you have shown exactly how crazy Muslims get when their mythological founder 'Mohammed' (the guy who raped Abu Bakr's 6 year old daughter Aisha, as well as raping his adopted son's wife because he liked incest - read the hadith) is exposed using your own scriptures that you don't think the rest of us know nor understand.
Annnnnd we're right back to Christians - and now I'm guess we can include Jews - being heartfelt believers in mother-son fucking, because Genesis says that's what Eve did. And hey, about all that genocide committed by the ancient Hebrews, eh? How about all those towns and cities murdered to the last man, woman and child to pave the way for "gods chosen people"?
You're onto something. Castro is exactly in line with Chavez (as you say 360 degrees, one full turn).
No, I didn't say 360 degrees, as the AC pointed out. Was reading comprehension an elective at Ayn Rand Elementary?
Which is, again, pretty much right on top of Castro, 'authoritarian asshole with a justification', going further left of that takes you back into right wing.
If Chavez was an authoritarian asshole, he would have thrown the various fascists and bourgeois motherfuckers trying to sabotage the country into a gulag, not *gasp* merely refuse to renew broadcast licenses. For stations that participated in a coup attempt.
The people who's phone's caught fire are already lawyered up.
Uh huh. And all of them did so 100% on their own dime, without a single one agreeing to take the case in exchange for part of the settlement. Sure.
How much do you think someone deserves for being put at risk? For a couple of weeks?
How much if it was your family at risk? As the AC points out above, Randian Wackjobs are so, so quick to say we don't need government regulations because negligence and incompetence may be handled through lawsuits in court. Until there's actually a suit, at which point you drag out the fainting couches at the prospect of a business being held accountable for their actions.
Pretty much. Back in 2004, the right-wing was going all in on ratfucking John Edwards for bringing "jacuzzi suits" in court, and winning millions from a jury. Except the case involved a girl who had her guts hydraulically sucked out of her body by a faulty pool drain, one the manufacturer knew was dangerous but DGAF because fixing it would have cause a few bucks.
Do wingers think the parents gave two shits of a flying fuck that Edwards got a good chunk of money in the process? Hell no, they would have sooner taken that companies money and burned it in the street rather than let them have it.
Then you're an idiot, unless you're talking about the Black Panthers, who only got guns for self-defense from the police state. You know, something NRA ammosexuals should have been 1010% behind, if they weren't completely full of crap.
They normally rely on carefully crafted logical fallacies, outright lies and the media to propogate them.
You mean Korean Central Television? Because that's how far you'd have to travel to find a controlling left wing media. Here in the U.S., it's hard core neocon neoliberal horsefuckery all day long, all day strong.
So when an extreme left-wing nutjob gun owner went into the Family Research Council office in DC, complete with a bag of chick-fil-a and a list of 'hate groups' from the Southern Poverty Law Center and shot someone before being wrestled to the ground... he was what?
The exception, not the rule. Any more stupid questions?
Slashdot Mirror
That old saw? Only by counting donations to churches as "charity", i.e. sophistry. Just because you get to write off your contribution to evangelical stadiums, Mormon castles and Catholic sex abuse settlements off your taxes does not make it charity.
Good luck with that deflection, Hillbot. If Trump's actions excuse Hillary's, then the reverse must also be true. So how many of Trump's comments are you going to write off in exchange for Hillary's racism in the 90's - calling minority kids Superpredators that needed to be "brought to heel"?
After the GOP threatened to do so under Bush, despite Bush getting every single thing he wanted (save Clinton's SS privatization and Justice Meyers). And only for non-SCOTUS judicial nominations - dimmerwit.
So WYP, DrunkWumpus? What does that do to change the point that Republicans would jettison the filibuster the nanosecond the Dems insisted they have 60 votes to name a post office?
And your Ranidan hand waiving has changed....nothing. Having a job to avoid destitution is treated as a responsibility, not a choice. Which means if the only available job is driving for Uber....you'll expect people to drive for Uber.
If you want to keep restating my point with different words, knock yourself out.
There's two questions here...."can we" and "should we". Nuclear powered reactors have a use case on aircraft carriers, as they are floating cities with immense power needs. For icebreakers, for power, long deployments, and acting as floating power plants for remote sites. Submarines, for obvious reasons.
Not really seeing it for cruisers, though, for a couple of reasons. First, the cost, which happens to be the Achilles heel of civilian nuclear power. For what it would cost to build and maintain a reactor on a cruiser, you could probably pay to have fuel oil shipped to it anywhere in the world, build enough wind and solar farms to make up for any CO2 burned as fuel, and save a nice chunk of money in the process. So if the purpose is to lower overall emissions, why bother.
Second reason is, the U.S. military hasn't faced anyone that can give it a kick in the teeth, or at least a bloody nose, since it got its imperialistic ass kicked out of Vietnam. If Hillary had won the election and tried to enforce her stupid fly zone over Syria, bomb Iran for the weapons program the CIA and Mossad said Iran didn't have, or take the "Asian Pivot" another step and sink a Chinese vessel, we might have a few sunken Navy vessels on our hands.
Aircraft carriers are kept at a distance and are well-defended. If a nuclear sub is sunk, it probably means it just fired off its nuclear missiles and we have much much greater things to worry about than having a mini-Chernobyl in the Persian Gulf. But if a cruiser is sunk because it was swarmed with enough missiles to overwhelm its defenses - you really want that mini-Chernobyl, or several of them? Countries that have been picked as enemies of the United States aren't going to bother trying to outspend the Pentagon's $1+ trillion annual budget, they're just going to get enough missiles together to sink your ships stalking their coastlines.
Try to "comprehend" the cost and risk arguments above. I'm sure the U.S. base in Okinawa uses a good amount of power - but why not simply buy it from Japan's civilian power infrastructure (even nuclear powered). For reasons based both on cost and risk. Let's say some trigger happy commander in Foal Eagle decides to fire some "warning shots" in the annual practice invasion of North Korea. North Korea, deciding its the real deal this time, decides to defend themselves by firing off some ballistic missiles at said Okinawan base. Mini-Chernobyl, again.
It has everything to do with it. The United States shells out at least $1.2 trillion a year on warmonger spending, more than the rest of the world combined. This is wholly and completely unneeded corporate welfare, in service of an American Empire. Nothing more, nothing less
Nah, you're still the useful idiot for regurgitating corporatist propaganda. Because you got that $30 with zero effort or risk on your part, and the company responsible had to pay for their actions that actually affected their quarterly dividends. Don't like it? Then spend thousands to tens of thousands of your own dollars to hire your own lawyer to file your own lawsuit. But be prepared to walk away with nothing but a huge bill from the law firm.
And then, even if you win, isn't going to do dick to change corporate behavior. Guess what will do that, particularly where consumers are nickel and dimmed? Class action lawsuits, that's what.
Nonsense. Increasing the the minimum wage would be a huge boost to Appalachia, as people who have more money to spend in the local economy. Which.....boosts the local economy.
Randian whackjobs, maybe, but those are a decided minority. But there's one little side effect to taking the majority of wealth created and funneling it not into the hands of the idle rich, but people who work for a living - they wont complain at paying another $5 a month so their garbageman doesn't need food stamps to feed his family.
Except that point is facile in a country where having a job is considered a responsibility, not a choice. If you run into Joe Somebody and driving for Uber is the difference between him having a roof over his head or having to live on public assistance - you'll tell him to stop whining and drive for Uber.
And when it's your industry made obsolete and you can't find another job, are you going to go dig your own grave and quietly lie in it - or did you not think that talking point through before vomiting it onto your keyboard?
Only if you've found some magical filter that hides all posts from gun nuts, Randians, nativists and American Exceptionalists. How often do you load a 400 comment story and wonder why you don't see any posts?
Sexism and wankery.
Ah, Randians....the most obnoxiously shortsighted, self-centered, entitled pricks on the planet.
Civilization costs money. Don't like having to pay your share of the cost - GTFO and move to the Libertarian Paradise. Remember to enjoy your cholera.
That's nice - now where's your counter-argument to what he actually said? Otherwise all you have is an ad hom with high amounts of spittle - which means the only 'retarded bullshit spewer' is you.
How so - has your area passed a universal income to go together with universal housing, health care and secondary education? If not, it's a farce to call taking the best job you can find (no matter how shitty) a "choice" when it's really a requirement.
Whenever it's the rich and the bourgeois taking it up the ass, rather than the poor, the fainting couches are whipped out and hands get chapped from frantic wringing. Doesn't matter if the people's revolution is in France, Russia, or Cuba.
Feaudalism == proto-capitalism, so the quote still applies.
Stop watching Fox and your IQ will go up 30 points within a week.
More like....a green card handed to anyone who crosses the Mexican border, no questions asked, with a short path to full citizenship. Very short. Because there isn't a single country south of the border that hasn't been fucked over by the United States. Over and over and over and over and over and over again. Real justice would mean increasing your taxes to pay trillions in restitution to every country from Mexico to Chile, and extraditing every living president and official from the CIA (and it's PR wing, the State Department) to face multiple lifetime sentences in prison.
So STFU and let Jorge cross the border, since his parents were murdered by a Reagan-backed death squad. Let Miguel work at a car wash, as you bankrupted his family farm with NAFTA and then turned his province into a war zone with your war on poor drug users. Margarita fled the U.S. backed junta in Honduras, so let her graduate from a goddamned public high school.
Don't like it - write your congressman to demand that taxes be raised through the stratosphere, and that Obama book a one-way flight from the White House on Jan 20 to a docket in Honduras, just for starters.
For the plebs, it's been dropping. Reason #2458 why raising the age for SS or Medicare is fascist BS.
Wow, the shell finally fell off the nut. Nobody's said anything about Jews in this thread, slick - you drunk? Not just drunk, but black-out drunk?
Annnnnd we're right back to Christians - and now I'm guess we can include Jews - being heartfelt believers in mother-son fucking, because Genesis says that's what Eve did. And hey, about all that genocide committed by the ancient Hebrews, eh? How about all those towns and cities murdered to the last man, woman and child to pave the way for "gods chosen people"?
Hypocritical religious fanatic, heal thyself.
No, I didn't say 360 degrees, as the AC pointed out. Was reading comprehension an elective at Ayn Rand Elementary?
If Chavez was an authoritarian asshole, he would have thrown the various fascists and bourgeois motherfuckers trying to sabotage the country into a gulag, not *gasp* merely refuse to renew broadcast licenses. For stations that participated in a coup attempt.
Uh huh. And all of them did so 100% on their own dime, without a single one agreeing to take the case in exchange for part of the settlement. Sure.
How much if it was your family at risk? As the AC points out above, Randian Wackjobs are so, so quick to say we don't need government regulations because negligence and incompetence may be handled through lawsuits in court. Until there's actually a suit, at which point you drag out the fainting couches at the prospect of a business being held accountable for their actions.
Pretty much. Back in 2004, the right-wing was going all in on ratfucking John Edwards for bringing "jacuzzi suits" in court, and winning millions from a jury. Except the case involved a girl who had her guts hydraulically sucked out of her body by a faulty pool drain, one the manufacturer knew was dangerous but DGAF because fixing it would have cause a few bucks.
Do wingers think the parents gave two shits of a flying fuck that Edwards got a good chunk of money in the process? Hell no, they would have sooner taken that companies money and burned it in the street rather than let them have it.
Then you're an idiot, unless you're talking about the Black Panthers, who only got guns for self-defense from the police state. You know, something NRA ammosexuals should have been 1010% behind, if they weren't completely full of crap.
You mean Korean Central Television? Because that's how far you'd have to travel to find a controlling left wing media. Here in the U.S., it's hard core neocon neoliberal horsefuckery all day long, all day strong.
The exception, not the rule. Any more stupid questions?