I mean, seriously, when and how did the penis size obsession get started anyway?
I'm too lazy to find any citations for any of this, but the basic idea is that since human males must have erections to copulate, and an erect penis is bigger than a flaccid one, larger penis size becomes associated with higher virility (even if it really has nothing to do with it). Similar theories apply to other parts of human anatomy that swell during sexual excitement (female breasts, etc.).
Another theory has it that since disease, disorders, and poor mental states hinder the ability to get an erection, the erection, and, by extension, the inherently larger penis, are indicators of overall health.
Either way, this feeds into a sexual selection cycle and men get bigger penises. As society develops, a parallel insecurity/pride becomes attached to having a smaller/larger penis.
You'll notice I started by pointing out something most think blindingly obvious: that men need erections to have sex. In most of the mammal class, this is not (or not entirely) the case, since most mammal species have "os penises" -- they contain a bone, making the penis always rigid. We are a rare exception. The above health-indicator theory has been put forward as an explanation for this as well (taking away our crutches to expose our weaknesses). My own theory says it's probably not a great idea to walk around with an erection all the time, when you walk upright and falling on your face the wrong way might mean permanent effective sterility.
I can't blame people quite as much for not understanding how to do proper research on something, or knowing signs of a scam.
Sounds like a lot of work for a lot of people. If only there were some kind of ofFicially-DesignAted group of people whose job it was to do all that work for us, and to make sure they cover every product that goes in our bodies, and prevent the crap from even being sold, so we wouldn't have to worry about it.
His comments have little to do with being a "Neoconservative" (a term the pro-Democrats sure do like to toss around a lot lately).
You have to "toss around" the term Neoconservative a lot when there are a lot of Neoconservatives running around.
I'm not voting Republican, yet I can easily understand the very BASIC concept that our current "Social Security" program amounts to nothing more than another tax on our income.
Who said it isn't a tax?
And before you go telling me taxes are automatically evil, just remember that taxes are just when we, as a society, pay our bills. You're not against paying our bills, are you?
There is NO such thing as a special "account" or "place" the S.S. income goes to and is kept/managed/invested.
Untrue. It is entrusted to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, and the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund.
Rather, it goes into a general pool of tax income the federal govt. collects and can SPEND any way they like.
Don't tell me Social Security isn't a good thing just because idiots keep electing Republican criminals who raid the fund. That's like saying having a house is bad because people break into houses and steal from them.
This has NOTHING to do with some concept that people should be totally "on their own" with no assistance whatsoever.
Don't be naïve. That (plus an opportunistic profit motive on the side) is exactly the philosophy that underlies every one of the attacks we keep seeing on the institutions that were put in place during progressive eras in the US.
if I had a way to at least "opt out" of the Social Security program? Yeah, I'd be much closer to having that 20% going into compound interest earning accounts that directly benefit me. How is that a BAD thing?
Because the way it is now, with Social Security, you and hundreds of millions of others are paying into the system together. Makes for a much more stable (and moral) system when everyone is covered. If you don't believe me, consider that before Social Security started, the elderly were above a 50% poverty rate, whereas now it tends to hover below 0.15%.
What I'm seeing where I live with regards to Global Warming isn't convincing me that its a crisis.
So what you're saying is that no amount of expertise nor evidence nor scientific process is going to dissuade you from coming to a conclusion based on what happened in your back yard.
I so wish I had mod points right now, so I could give you one.
The Republican grandparent poster seems to think, as is typical of Neoconservatives, that it's best if everyone is simply on their own -- that a society, mutually helping each other out and providing a safety net for all, is an invalid concept. That if you're unable to get by in the wilderness on your own, hey, too bad, guess you're going to die, and good riddance.
I just wish those of his ilk would go away somewhere and form their own country, and show us all just how well that thinking works.
There are plenty of shit-hole countries around the world where the government's contact with its people is tenuous at best, and you are, as you seem to wish, on your own in all circumstances, and no one helps. Go on, tough guy, go live out in the wild frontier. After all, you're not stupid, are you?
This is America, and you're still expected to do what you can for yourself first. This isn't a socialist country where we care for each other's every need.
You say that like it's a good thing. I wonder why.
And it's even worse than that. Every now and then, between the let's-do-what-I-like and the you-should-already-know-what-I-want, you'll get the "why can't you take charge, like a real man" gambit.
Computerized "ballots" (those not submitted as physical objects) can't truly exist and must be banned.
Untrue. It would involve a lot of digital signing and whatnot, and almost no one voting would actually understand what was going on behind the scenes, and it would probably have a lot of problems for years till all the bugs, holes, and exploits were discovered and eradicated, but it could be done.
Or we could just stick with paper and ink. (Ideally, printed by a machine with some "Here is how I thought you voted; OK/Go back/Cancel?" in it.)
NOW, the race hustlers, they all say one thing but what they really mean is "we support SOCIALISTS of every race, religion and sexual orientation."
Jesus Fucking Christ. How did this idiot get modded up to +5 for anything other than a ironic Funny?
Seriously, how many McCainPoints(tm) does this post get you? Will you be ordering that new coffee mug tomorrow? Because I've rarely seen so many of the Republican smearing-point lies concatenated together in a single post.
Ah, gotta go now. I think I hear the Republican downmod squad coming to shove me into oblivion...
She's done budgets, personnel, and signed and vetoed legislation.
Budgets -- in a state with lots more money coming in than going out. Wow, how tough.
Personnel -- in Alaska? How many are we talking about here? Twelve?
Signed and vetoed legislation -- which is, of course, nothing at all like voting yes or no for legislation. Oh wait, it's exactly like it.
The fact is that his picking her is a transparent, cynical, and, above all, intellectually insulting attempt to sway people who to vote purely on the genitalia of their representatives.
Let me tell you a little story. My wife came to this country after spending her first 32 years in a communist country -- and loathing it the whole time. She has spent a bit short of six years here in the US. The first words out of her mouth tonight when I got home and asked her if she heard about McCain's pick were to the effect that he's trying to get Hillary voters and he thinks they're stupid enough to do so just because she's a woman. I had to smile at her easy insight despite her lack of experience with American politics.
The fact is, Palin is a joke and the joke's on McCain.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm too lazy to find any citations for any of this, but the basic idea is that since human males must have erections to copulate, and an erect penis is bigger than a flaccid one, larger penis size becomes associated with higher virility (even if it really has nothing to do with it). Similar theories apply to other parts of human anatomy that swell during sexual excitement (female breasts, etc.).
Another theory has it that since disease, disorders, and poor mental states hinder the ability to get an erection, the erection, and, by extension, the inherently larger penis, are indicators of overall health.
Either way, this feeds into a sexual selection cycle and men get bigger penises. As society develops, a parallel insecurity/pride becomes attached to having a smaller/larger penis.
You'll notice I started by pointing out something most think blindingly obvious: that men need erections to have sex. In most of the mammal class, this is not (or not entirely) the case, since most mammal species have "os penises" -- they contain a bone, making the penis always rigid. We are a rare exception. The above health-indicator theory has been put forward as an explanation for this as well (taking away our crutches to expose our weaknesses). My own theory says it's probably not a great idea to walk around with an erection all the time, when you walk upright and falling on your face the wrong way might mean permanent effective sterility.
Sounds like a lot of work for a lot of people. If only there were some kind of ofFicially-DesignAted group of people whose job it was to do all that work for us, and to make sure they cover every product that goes in our bodies, and prevent the crap from even being sold, so we wouldn't have to worry about it.
Also remarkable: a business model that goes like this:
You'll notice the "???" and "Profit!" steps are all thoroughly pre-mixed in with all the other steps, for your Slashdotting convenience.
Doesn't help if you're also forced to watch bad movies.
You have to "toss around" the term Neoconservative a lot when there are a lot of Neoconservatives running around.
Who said it isn't a tax?
And before you go telling me taxes are automatically evil, just remember that taxes are just when we, as a society, pay our bills. You're not against paying our bills, are you?
Untrue. It is entrusted to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, and the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund.
Don't tell me Social Security isn't a good thing just because idiots keep electing Republican criminals who raid the fund. That's like saying having a house is bad because people break into houses and steal from them.
Don't be naïve. That (plus an opportunistic profit motive on the side) is exactly the philosophy that underlies every one of the attacks we keep seeing on the institutions that were put in place during progressive eras in the US.
Because the way it is now, with Social Security, you and hundreds of millions of others are paying into the system together. Makes for a much more stable (and moral) system when everyone is covered. If you don't believe me, consider that before Social Security started, the elderly were above a 50% poverty rate, whereas now it tends to hover below 0.15%.
I don't know about you, but my mouse cursor also obscures what it touches.
Of course, it is much smaller than my hands (on (100 minus epsilon) percent of displays).
So maybe the real answer is displays so large that the buttons and documents and whatnot are hardly obscured by one's hands.
So what you're saying is that no amount of expertise nor evidence nor scientific process is going to dissuade you from coming to a conclusion based on what happened in your back yard.
I so wish I had mod points right now, so I could give you one.
The Republican grandparent poster seems to think, as is typical of Neoconservatives, that it's best if everyone is simply on their own -- that a society, mutually helping each other out and providing a safety net for all, is an invalid concept. That if you're unable to get by in the wilderness on your own, hey, too bad, guess you're going to die, and good riddance.
I just wish those of his ilk would go away somewhere and form their own country, and show us all just how well that thinking works.
Then I take it that you are, at this very moment, making plans to move permanently to some other country?
So why are you still here?
There are plenty of shit-hole countries around the world where the government's contact with its people is tenuous at best, and you are, as you seem to wish, on your own in all circumstances, and no one helps. Go on, tough guy, go live out in the wild frontier. After all, you're not stupid, are you?
The point of class action lawsuits is not to make thousands of plaintiffs rich. It's to punish the defendant for wrongdoing.
You say that like it's a good thing. I wonder why.
What if they're twelve-cent checks?
Hmm, I wonder if YouTube would change their tune if they started receiving DMCA takedown notices on every video ever posted...
And we can afford to have McCain as our president, despite getting that, and every other issue wrong?
That's simply irrational.
http://xkcd.com/260/
And it's even worse than that. Every now and then, between the let's-do-what-I-like and the you-should-already-know-what-I-want, you'll get the "why can't you take charge, like a real man" gambit.
Can't win for losing.
Because the alternative is McCain, who will guarantee to do all the wrong things?
Just because he doesn't do every last thing you want, you're going to let the wolves eat us all?
The perfect is the enemy of the good. --Voltaire
Untrue. It would involve a lot of digital signing and whatnot, and almost no one voting would actually understand what was going on behind the scenes, and it would probably have a lot of problems for years till all the bugs, holes, and exploits were discovered and eradicated, but it could be done.
Or we could just stick with paper and ink. (Ideally, printed by a machine with some "Here is how I thought you voted; OK/Go back/Cancel?" in it.)
Jesus Fucking Christ. How did this idiot get modded up to +5 for anything other than a ironic Funny?
Seriously, how many McCainPoints(tm) does this post get you? Will you be ordering that new coffee mug tomorrow? Because I've rarely seen so many of the Republican smearing-point lies concatenated together in a single post.
Ah, gotta go now. I think I hear the Republican downmod squad coming to shove me into oblivion...
Budgets -- in a state with lots more money coming in than going out. Wow, how tough.
Personnel -- in Alaska? How many are we talking about here? Twelve?
Signed and vetoed legislation -- which is, of course, nothing at all like voting yes or no for legislation. Oh wait, it's exactly like it.
The fact is that his picking her is a transparent, cynical, and, above all, intellectually insulting attempt to sway people who to vote purely on the genitalia of their representatives.
Let me tell you a little story. My wife came to this country after spending her first 32 years in a communist country -- and loathing it the whole time. She has spent a bit short of six years here in the US. The first words out of her mouth tonight when I got home and asked her if she heard about McCain's pick were to the effect that he's trying to get Hillary voters and he thinks they're stupid enough to do so just because she's a woman. I had to smile at her easy insight despite her lack of experience with American politics.
The fact is, Palin is a joke and the joke's on McCain.
Bet you dollars to doughnut holes his true (and secret) answer is "being a Republican".
Good thing, then, that one of them will be put in the Vice Presidency, where he or she can't do any harm.
<rimshot />
Unless, of course, we continue with the Al Gore/Dick Cheney model of increasing responsibility and activity from the Vice President's office...
For free hat? For free Tibet? For free space?
Sorry, pet peeve. You wouldn't say "for expensive", so don't say "for free".
...what the hell is VoIP 2.0?
Now with all-new Buzzword Compliance Module?