Having a 911 button on a cell phone (bringing it back on topic) servers only to make people into children again, tattling to mom over trifles, instead of dealing with it as adults.
At one time, all you had to do was press the 9 for several seconds and it would automatically dial 911 for you. It didn't even matter if you had service, as long as the frequency of the phone matched a tower in range, it would connect you.
I used to get trac phones back in the late 90's and give them to people I knew without phone service just so they would have an emergency life line if ever needed. I remember some charities were asking for your old phones in order to do the same- give them to the poor without phones so they could use 911 if they ever needed to.
This panic button may already exist if the phones still do this. It might also explain how an ass can hit numbers so far apart then press send all in the correct sequence (by pressing the 9 for several seconds and the phone automatically doing the rest).
I will bet it is a crappy police force or the guy dresses and talks like something they don't like.
In my home town, the cops are corrupt. Not all of them, but most of the ones you will ever meet. I specifically remember the cops pulling a friend over for speeding and then ripping his dash apart claiming he had to check the serial numbers on the radio to see if it was stolen- it was a crappy stock radio. The problem that started this was when the cop went back to his car to write the citation and call the information in, my friend turned on the radio to break the silence and that seemed to piss the cop off when he came back and heard Van Halen playing. So the serial numbers supposedly was correct or not in their stolen database and we were left on the side of the road with the dash torn apart, the radio in the passenger seat, and a speeding ticket. Complaints to the chief were met with he was just doing his job.
Another time, I saw a guy get pulled over in front of my house. The cops asked if they could search the car and he said as soon as you get a warrant. Then one of the officers yelled, what is that, is there someone in your trunk, hand cuffed the guy and sat him on the curb while they proceeded to go through the entire car. I remember busting up laughing when the guy yelled something about how in the hell is anyone going to fit under the spare tire. I got the evil eye from the cop and went inside. Evidently they didn't find anything because after hearing some cussing, I saw him drive off while watching through the window.
On the other hand, I have had to deal with the state police in many different states. They always seem to be professional, as kind as you can be without ignoring the reason you are interacting with them, and direct to the point. So I know there are good cops out there, I also know there are some ass hats with John Wayne syndrome or something too. I imagine the John Wayne wannabes eventually get in trouble for something and go to desk duty which might be the guys problem with going to his local police station.
Perhaps the problem is not in not having a job but in running the jobs off in the first place?
I mean seriously, detroit was booming in previous years which is what allowed them to rack up so many obligations that eventially lead to its backruptcy. So perhaps the question shouldn't be about the location but rather the economics policies, oppertinity, and other aspects in areas with jobs verses those without. There will be no magical one thing but there are somr things yhat may make a big difference.
I'm wondering just how much of that increase in cost of living actually is the fault of techies and not changes made by the governmrnt or other sources of influence. I'm sure other aspects have come into play other than just good paying jobs. California and its cities have been playing eith financial dificulties for a while and it makes sense for the rent to be raised when property taxes go up and so on. I thought SF was overly expensive when i visited it in the 90s anyways.
I've seen that happenn in other locations. Govrrnments raise fees and taxes to pay for services some people demmand. It then causes local economics to change slightly. Usually this is not widely noticable but things like fast food or registration costs for your car and so one can add up. For instance, i would pay an extra $35 for car license plates if i lived inside the city limits. They recently enacted a storm water run off tax that every building owner has to pay based on the size of buildings in on their property. They added a state till tax which means a sales tax is paid on every dollar thst comes into the business regardless of costs and the city added more to it. The efect is simular to buying online verses brick and morter except you can see close to 2 cents on the dollar difference in cost be shopping one town the other direction rather than the closest town to me. It doesn't sound like much but over a year, everything starts adding up and it is more noticable with the less pay you make.
Yeah, because no civilization has ever existed in the past without government because they were all poisoned. And all businesses started as slave traders.
You are a complete idiot. Many people would love a government that was limited to simple neccesary functions like safe food supplies and no slavery. I have absolutely no clue why you think limiting government means no functioning government at all. It must be something you imagine in order to justify your ideology to yourself. But you should rethink that imagination often. Slavery would not have been possible without a large government and historically came about because of big governments of the times.
I think what he is saying is that it takes more then just a buyer else we would have seen the results by now. Not that it will never happen- its just that there are no sellers right now.
Besides, if there were sellers, I suspect one of the governments would be buying it already- with or without our knowledge. A nuke isn't something you can advertise a willingness to sell and keep quiet so much that no government would find out about it. I think a number of governments would simply outbid everyone else to either get something they don't have or prevent it from going to someone who doesn't already have one. The stakes are simply too high to ignore something like that.
And that leads me to think no one would ever sell a nuke. They might steal one for their own use but the range of damage probably has too high of a chance of including the seller or something the seller might care about.
Actually, no the law cannot. As we have seen with several states recently, the law cannot under their state constitutions define marriage as between a man and a woman.
Similarly, with these same problems in defining them however they want, there will be problems with defining them against people of age of consent- even if they are directly related, multiple spouses, authoritative figures and subordinates and so on. So eventually, we might end up seeing not only a brother marrying his sister, but his other brother, school teacher, and widowed mom too. If they do not reproduce, there is nothing technically medically or scientifically wrong about that either. There would be no overriding policing authority for the states to impose such limitations which seems to be how legally defining marriage only between a man and a women was defeated in most of the states which the courts made marriage legal.
You might ask why would someone want to marry their sister or mom or more then one spouse if they aren't going to reproduce. That answer is simple, death taxes and other benefits like being added to insurance or medicare or social security payments. The supreme court rules against the Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA) due to estate/death taxes being challenged. So we already know it is a reason or part of one that people want to become married.
It won't happen. People are upset but not about the same things. There has been a shift in the US over the last 20 or so years that seems to want to get away from a limited federal government and impose any and everything from a top down model- as long as it somehow can be justified. The push for more government interference (usually by those on the left but definitely involving those on the right and in between also) has long been something people have fought against and lost for the most part. Reagan used to say something along the lines of the bigger the government, the smaller the citizen which seems to be true.
What we seem to have is the government going from a body constituted by sovereign citizens to serve the good of the union to a citizen being subject to the sovereign of the country. That used to be what made the US unique, that the government was subservient to the people whereas now the people are subservient to the government. This is obvious with the PPACA where you have to purchase something from a third party just for being a US citizen or legal resident subject to the jurisdiction thereof else face a penalty with absolutely no due process of law or just compensation for the confiscation of property. And not only did people cheer this on, they voted to keep the people who brought it about around to manipulate it even more.
You seem to have the ability to comprehend this a bit more then I can so let me ask if this couldn't possible be a cure for HIV as well.
My though would be to extract a portion of the cells and cleans them from damaged cells you have a pure version. Then induce the self destruct while in a clean room and allow it all to implode on itself. after this is done, then simply stop the implosion, reintroduce the clean cells, and use the inhibitor to slowly bring the body back to normal. If successful, it will be HIV free.
Or am I thinking way to science fiction on this and what I said essentially the equivalent of using a transporter beam to isolate pathogens and direct them to a containment field instead of re-materializing the entire body. I'm thinking that basically it would be allowing the contamination to kill itself off and then rebuild the body without the flaws. Kind of like instead of fighting a fire one room at a time, let it burn down and rebuild a better house on the same land.
What are you 5? I mean do you seriously think you are going to gain anything by responding to a troll with a troll comment? The poster you are replying to is nothing but a troll- likely not remotely religious and just spouting bigotry (if the AC wasn't you trying to set up the garbage reply you gave) and your trying to validate it with continuing the toll? The comment has so many negative votes, I had to hit the parent button just to see the context of your ramblings. So by your reply, you actually exposed more people to that vile post.
And you even have to inject specifically male homosexual activity in order separate gays from lesbians (which is an idiotic distinction anyways) which the parent did nothing of the sort. But on top of all that, you have to try to be offensive in the process. By your logic (or lack thereof), I can only reason you are the original poster and trying to troll the interweb.
I think you are forgetting about the FireHose. Chances are one if not both of the dupes was promoted via the fire hose where enough positive votes promoted it as designed.
Nope, nothing at all wrong with it. We have seen it in the US when they cannot find employees willing to work for low wages, they up and move the company to Mexico or India, or China. Thank goodness for free trade and Clinton to set it all rolling.
But you would have to be blind to think Amazon is overestimating their positioning here. To deal with the strike, they are simply transferring the work load to other countries and thanks to the EU trade agreements, it is working for them. So outside of being stuck paying a lease on some property inside Germany, Amazon will not fail at all. And most of that costs can be recouped with an add on delivery charge specific to Germany deliveries.
Lol.. the term computer came about because of what it originally replaced which was teams of mathmeticians who's job was to compute complex math problems. The original computer rooms consisted of tables, pencils, and paper (possible some slide rulers too).
Now i know you were think of the digital wonders we have now, but the only thing missing from a paper and pencil being considered a computer is the person computing. But don't let this fun fact take away from your point. Those and the abacus is far from what we consider to be a computer today. I just wanted to piint to how right and wrong the concept was at the same time.
The 13th really has nothing to do with it. No one will need to be compelled to do this so it would be neither involuntary or slavery. It would be more like charity.
Oh, and as soon as the 13th does come into play, you need to involve the 5th too. Time and effort is still the most common private property held by the people and if it is seized for public use, just compensation is more than appropriate.
Maybe just to piss california off. Or maybe to secure against hackers bricking your phone or possibly companies wanting to up their sales or lock you into another contract.
What in the world would make you think that outside of ignorance of state's rights. The feds are constitutionally empowered to regulate commerce between the states. State's rights is about keeping the feds out of areas they are not constitutionally supposed to be in, not empowering states above the constitution.
California is more than capable of placing restrictions and requirements on commerce conducted withing its borders as long as it doesn't favor local companies over other US companies. The problem of states essentially dictating to the rest of the nation is more of a problem with companies being so large that compliance withing that state ends up influencing every product sold in other states.
What the parent complains of can be fixed by companies only offering cartain models within those states. The motor vehicle industry did this for the longest time.
No one invaded the US in WWI. Granted our entrance into WWII had an attack on US territory but there was no invasion until after we entered the war. Of course you can argue that the US had no interest in entrring those wars but we did and have largely structured our defende strategies around no allowing other countries wars unfold to the point another world war would happen ever since.
Concentrating on someone invading the US is a complete mistake. If someone invaded Mexico or even Canada, you better bet the US would enter the war. Same goes for a number of countries in south america as well as around the world. But if we knew some country was buying arms to invade colimbia, strengthening their defenses for that particular threat could very well avoid a war or even stop it before it got large enough to become another WWI or vietnam or Korea. So lets look at the entire picture rather that only the portions that can easily be discredited. Or should we forget the lessons history has taught us and become another Neville Chamberlain. Even if you think we should, the cold war has shown that the defense strategies of the US and quite a bit of the rest of the would do not think we should.
Godwin is more or less a way to be intelectually lazy any more. Back when it first came about, it wasn't the entrance of Nazis, hitler, or any evil historical figure into debates that was the problem, it was when a point or participant was compared to or likened to them. The observation was that once that happened, nothing constructive would come after and it would de-evolve into personal attacks and so on so debate was essentially over there.
Now it is a trick of the dishonest and intelectually lazy who think any mention automatically means a loss in the debate and if they point it out, they somehow win it. This is true even in discussion about WWII to some even.
Sometimes the mention of these topics are beneficial to the debates. This is especially true when discussing topics like oppresive governments and data collection. Its likr that sayong about when you don't know about history, you are doomed to repeat it.
It appears the biggest thing stopping releases right now it the reporter Greenwald trying to monitize the process. Snowden says greenwald has all the dicuments.
There are people right now trying to organize mercenary teams to find snowden and turn hum in to the US. There is even one of the right wing radio host claiming they want to start a kickstarter campain to crowd source this.
Yep, no reason to worry about anything at all. It is not like no other country has been invaded or any world wars have been started by countries allying together and sharing military tech or anything.
With an honest president, this crap would have been stopped long before a Snowden would have appeared.
What we have is an untold amount of information being collected and disiminated to foreign organizations with a reporter and internet salesman in possession of it to start their newest money making venture and the guy eho initially took the information it is offering to help other countries defeat the US inteligence gathering that is likely constitutional. What a mess we have
I don't think he claimed it was leftist government rather that it was government the left supports. Its a small but significant difference as the government can be left or right and its the left that wants more of it.
The bigger the state(government) the smaller the citizen. What you said is also true but neglected where it leaves us.
Not true. Clothes are designed to hide flaws in the human body. Most women are flawed to some degree. Air brushing models and makeup to hide some of them have been around for quite a while.
Now i could understand your conclusion about him maybe being gay if he said something along the lines of a man in clothing is more attractive than a naked woman but he didn't.
Slashdot Mirror
At one time, all you had to do was press the 9 for several seconds and it would automatically dial 911 for you. It didn't even matter if you had service, as long as the frequency of the phone matched a tower in range, it would connect you.
I used to get trac phones back in the late 90's and give them to people I knew without phone service just so they would have an emergency life line if ever needed. I remember some charities were asking for your old phones in order to do the same- give them to the poor without phones so they could use 911 if they ever needed to.
This panic button may already exist if the phones still do this. It might also explain how an ass can hit numbers so far apart then press send all in the correct sequence (by pressing the 9 for several seconds and the phone automatically doing the rest).
I will bet it is a crappy police force or the guy dresses and talks like something they don't like.
In my home town, the cops are corrupt. Not all of them, but most of the ones you will ever meet. I specifically remember the cops pulling a friend over for speeding and then ripping his dash apart claiming he had to check the serial numbers on the radio to see if it was stolen- it was a crappy stock radio. The problem that started this was when the cop went back to his car to write the citation and call the information in, my friend turned on the radio to break the silence and that seemed to piss the cop off when he came back and heard Van Halen playing. So the serial numbers supposedly was correct or not in their stolen database and we were left on the side of the road with the dash torn apart, the radio in the passenger seat, and a speeding ticket. Complaints to the chief were met with he was just doing his job.
Another time, I saw a guy get pulled over in front of my house. The cops asked if they could search the car and he said as soon as you get a warrant. Then one of the officers yelled, what is that, is there someone in your trunk, hand cuffed the guy and sat him on the curb while they proceeded to go through the entire car. I remember busting up laughing when the guy yelled something about how in the hell is anyone going to fit under the spare tire. I got the evil eye from the cop and went inside. Evidently they didn't find anything because after hearing some cussing, I saw him drive off while watching through the window.
On the other hand, I have had to deal with the state police in many different states. They always seem to be professional, as kind as you can be without ignoring the reason you are interacting with them, and direct to the point. So I know there are good cops out there, I also know there are some ass hats with John Wayne syndrome or something too. I imagine the John Wayne wannabes eventually get in trouble for something and go to desk duty which might be the guys problem with going to his local police station.
Perhaps the problem is not in not having a job but in running the jobs off in the first place?
I mean seriously, detroit was booming in previous years which is what allowed them to rack up so many obligations that eventially lead to its backruptcy. So perhaps the question shouldn't be about the location but rather the economics policies, oppertinity, and other aspects in areas with jobs verses those without. There will be no magical one thing but there are somr things yhat may make a big difference.
I'm wondering just how much of that increase in cost of living actually is the fault of techies and not changes made by the governmrnt or other sources of influence. I'm sure other aspects have come into play other than just good paying jobs. California and its cities have been playing eith financial dificulties for a while and it makes sense for the rent to be raised when property taxes go up and so on. I thought SF was overly expensive when i visited it in the 90s anyways.
I've seen that happenn in other locations. Govrrnments raise fees and taxes to pay for services some people demmand. It then causes local economics to change slightly. Usually this is not widely noticable but things like fast food or registration costs for your car and so one can add up. For instance, i would pay an extra $35 for car license plates if i lived inside the city limits. They recently enacted a storm water run off tax that every building owner has to pay based on the size of buildings in on their property. They added a state till tax which means a sales tax is paid on every dollar thst comes into the business regardless of costs and the city added more to it. The efect is simular to buying online verses brick and morter except you can see close to 2 cents on the dollar difference in cost be shopping one town the other direction rather than the closest town to me. It doesn't sound like much but over a year, everything starts adding up and it is more noticable with the less pay you make.
Yeah, because no civilization has ever existed in the past without government because they were all poisoned. And all businesses started as slave traders.
You are a complete idiot. Many people would love a government that was limited to simple neccesary functions like safe food supplies and no slavery. I have absolutely no clue why you think limiting government means no functioning government at all. It must be something you imagine in order to justify your ideology to yourself. But you should rethink that imagination often. Slavery would not have been possible without a large government and historically came about because of big governments of the times.
I think what he is saying is that it takes more then just a buyer else we would have seen the results by now. Not that it will never happen- its just that there are no sellers right now.
Besides, if there were sellers, I suspect one of the governments would be buying it already- with or without our knowledge. A nuke isn't something you can advertise a willingness to sell and keep quiet so much that no government would find out about it. I think a number of governments would simply outbid everyone else to either get something they don't have or prevent it from going to someone who doesn't already have one. The stakes are simply too high to ignore something like that.
And that leads me to think no one would ever sell a nuke. They might steal one for their own use but the range of damage probably has too high of a chance of including the seller or something the seller might care about.
Actually, no the law cannot. As we have seen with several states recently, the law cannot under their state constitutions define marriage as between a man and a woman.
Similarly, with these same problems in defining them however they want, there will be problems with defining them against people of age of consent- even if they are directly related, multiple spouses, authoritative figures and subordinates and so on. So eventually, we might end up seeing not only a brother marrying his sister, but his other brother, school teacher, and widowed mom too. If they do not reproduce, there is nothing technically medically or scientifically wrong about that either. There would be no overriding policing authority for the states to impose such limitations which seems to be how legally defining marriage only between a man and a women was defeated in most of the states which the courts made marriage legal.
You might ask why would someone want to marry their sister or mom or more then one spouse if they aren't going to reproduce. That answer is simple, death taxes and other benefits like being added to insurance or medicare or social security payments. The supreme court rules against the Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA) due to estate/death taxes being challenged. So we already know it is a reason or part of one that people want to become married.
It won't happen. People are upset but not about the same things. There has been a shift in the US over the last 20 or so years that seems to want to get away from a limited federal government and impose any and everything from a top down model- as long as it somehow can be justified. The push for more government interference (usually by those on the left but definitely involving those on the right and in between also) has long been something people have fought against and lost for the most part. Reagan used to say something along the lines of the bigger the government, the smaller the citizen which seems to be true.
What we seem to have is the government going from a body constituted by sovereign citizens to serve the good of the union to a citizen being subject to the sovereign of the country. That used to be what made the US unique, that the government was subservient to the people whereas now the people are subservient to the government. This is obvious with the PPACA where you have to purchase something from a third party just for being a US citizen or legal resident subject to the jurisdiction thereof else face a penalty with absolutely no due process of law or just compensation for the confiscation of property. And not only did people cheer this on, they voted to keep the people who brought it about around to manipulate it even more.
You seem to have the ability to comprehend this a bit more then I can so let me ask if this couldn't possible be a cure for HIV as well.
My though would be to extract a portion of the cells and cleans them from damaged cells you have a pure version. Then induce the self destruct while in a clean room and allow it all to implode on itself. after this is done, then simply stop the implosion, reintroduce the clean cells, and use the inhibitor to slowly bring the body back to normal. If successful, it will be HIV free.
Or am I thinking way to science fiction on this and what I said essentially the equivalent of using a transporter beam to isolate pathogens and direct them to a containment field instead of re-materializing the entire body. I'm thinking that basically it would be allowing the contamination to kill itself off and then rebuild the body without the flaws. Kind of like instead of fighting a fire one room at a time, let it burn down and rebuild a better house on the same land.
What are you 5? I mean do you seriously think you are going to gain anything by responding to a troll with a troll comment? The poster you are replying to is nothing but a troll- likely not remotely religious and just spouting bigotry (if the AC wasn't you trying to set up the garbage reply you gave) and your trying to validate it with continuing the toll? The comment has so many negative votes, I had to hit the parent button just to see the context of your ramblings. So by your reply, you actually exposed more people to that vile post.
And you even have to inject specifically male homosexual activity in order separate gays from lesbians (which is an idiotic distinction anyways) which the parent did nothing of the sort. But on top of all that, you have to try to be offensive in the process. By your logic (or lack thereof), I can only reason you are the original poster and trying to troll the interweb.
I think you are forgetting about the FireHose. Chances are one if not both of the dupes was promoted via the fire hose where enough positive votes promoted it as designed.
Nope, nothing at all wrong with it. We have seen it in the US when they cannot find employees willing to work for low wages, they up and move the company to Mexico or India, or China. Thank goodness for free trade and Clinton to set it all rolling.
But you would have to be blind to think Amazon is overestimating their positioning here. To deal with the strike, they are simply transferring the work load to other countries and thanks to the EU trade agreements, it is working for them. So outside of being stuck paying a lease on some property inside Germany, Amazon will not fail at all. And most of that costs can be recouped with an add on delivery charge specific to Germany deliveries.
Lol.. the term computer came about because of what it originally replaced which was teams of mathmeticians who's job was to compute complex math problems. The original computer rooms consisted of tables, pencils, and paper (possible some slide rulers too).
Now i know you were think of the digital wonders we have now, but the only thing missing from a paper and pencil being considered a computer is the person computing. But don't let this fun fact take away from your point. Those and the abacus is far from what we consider to be a computer today. I just wanted to piint to how right and wrong the concept was at the same time.
The 13th really has nothing to do with it. No one will need to be compelled to do this so it would be neither involuntary or slavery. It would be more like charity.
Oh, and as soon as the 13th does come into play, you need to involve the 5th too. Time and effort is still the most common private property held by the people and if it is seized for public use, just compensation is more than appropriate.
Maybe just to piss california off. Or maybe to secure against hackers bricking your phone or possibly companies wanting to up their sales or lock you into another contract.
What in the world would make you think that outside of ignorance of state's rights. The feds are constitutionally empowered to regulate commerce between the states. State's rights is about keeping the feds out of areas they are not constitutionally supposed to be in, not empowering states above the constitution.
California is more than capable of placing restrictions and requirements on commerce conducted withing its borders as long as it doesn't favor local companies over other US companies. The problem of states essentially dictating to the rest of the nation is more of a problem with companies being so large that compliance withing that state ends up influencing every product sold in other states.
What the parent complains of can be fixed by companies only offering cartain models within those states. The motor vehicle industry did this for the longest time.
No one invaded the US in WWI. Granted our entrance into WWII had an attack on US territory but there was no invasion until after we entered the war. Of course you can argue that the US had no interest in entrring those wars but we did and have largely structured our defende strategies around no allowing other countries wars unfold to the point another world war would happen ever since.
Concentrating on someone invading the US is a complete mistake. If someone invaded Mexico or even Canada, you better bet the US would enter the war. Same goes for a number of countries in south america as well as around the world. But if we knew some country was buying arms to invade colimbia, strengthening their defenses for that particular threat could very well avoid a war or even stop it before it got large enough to become another WWI or vietnam or Korea. So lets look at the entire picture rather that only the portions that can easily be discredited. Or should we forget the lessons history has taught us and become another Neville Chamberlain. Even if you think we should, the cold war has shown that the defense strategies of the US and quite a bit of the rest of the would do not think we should.
Godwin is more or less a way to be intelectually lazy any more. Back when it first came about, it wasn't the entrance of Nazis, hitler, or any evil historical figure into debates that was the problem, it was when a point or participant was compared to or likened to them. The observation was that once that happened, nothing constructive would come after and it would de-evolve into personal attacks and so on so debate was essentially over there.
Now it is a trick of the dishonest and intelectually lazy who think any mention automatically means a loss in the debate and if they point it out, they somehow win it. This is true even in discussion about WWII to some even.
Sometimes the mention of these topics are beneficial to the debates. This is especially true when discussing topics like oppresive governments and data collection. Its likr that sayong about when you don't know about history, you are doomed to repeat it.
It appears the biggest thing stopping releases right now it the reporter Greenwald trying to monitize the process. Snowden says greenwald has all the dicuments.
There are people right now trying to organize mercenary teams to find snowden and turn hum in to the US. There is even one of the right wing radio host claiming they want to start a kickstarter campain to crowd source this.
Yep, no reason to worry about anything at all. It is not like no other country has been invaded or any world wars have been started by countries allying together and sharing military tech or anything.
Lol.. not only that, they are suggesting the watchers watch the watchers to make the report.
With an honest president, this crap would have been stopped long before a Snowden would have appeared.
What we have is an untold amount of information being collected and disiminated to foreign organizations with a reporter and internet salesman in possession of it to start their newest money making venture and the guy eho initially took the information it is offering to help other countries defeat the US inteligence gathering that is likely constitutional. What a mess we have
Nah, i'm plenty old enough and remeber quit well.
I don't think he claimed it was leftist government rather that it was government the left supports. Its a small but significant difference as the government can be left or right and its the left that wants more of it.
The bigger the state(government) the smaller the citizen. What you said is also true but neglected where it leaves us.
Not true. Clothes are designed to hide flaws in the human body. Most women are flawed to some degree. Air brushing models and makeup to hide some of them have been around for quite a while.
Now i could understand your conclusion about him maybe being gay if he said something along the lines of a man in clothing is more attractive than a naked woman but he didn't.