Actually, it's a not true scottsman situation. Many people identify themselves with one of the two major parties but do absolutely nothing to participate with them. For instance, a low income single mother is more likely to vote democrat if they ever voted. They however, may not have ever voted, do not even know the names of politicians running, or the names of politicians already seated in office. They likely registered to vote at one time because it was easy and secondary to something they were already doing like renewing a drivers license. Likewise, someone of the same situation who is too proud to take assistance, perhaps thinks their situation is exaggerated because taxes are high or something, might vote republican but still suffer the same participation issues.
Now, republicans, just like democrats, who are real republicans and democrats would vote without needing to be reminded. It's the people who do not vote, who do not care about politics and couldn't tell you who Joe Biden is,that need reminding to vote because they are the new independents. If you can get enough idiots (as used with Athenian democracy) to show up and cast a vote, all you need to do is get the rights ones to show and you have increased the party's chances enormously. This is where the reminders to vote come into play. And yes, face book has already combed through postings to see the political leanings of it's users and could pick the right people to remind in order to influence their positions or party picks.
And i wish governments would get out of the way in excess of what is needed to create a thriving society that all can participate in and the poir can litterally lift themselves out of poverty as soon as they understand what does not work.
Lets keep whishing and complaining because your vision is incompatible with mine and mine seems to take too much power from government to be a reality.
I don't have to worry about it anyways, I'm not in Maine and I'm sure someone else would kill her if she ended up killing/infecting others. But you should be worried about it. The WHO says Ebola can stay alive for days in blood. They also say that wild animals get Ebola and infect humans. So that fantasy is actually real life in other parts of the world.
No, it is not false. A proficient shooter with capable back stopping presents not even the slightests risk of stray bullets hitting anything other than what was intended.
So what happens is people make mistakes, get careless, or even distracted and bad things happen. Now here is your problem. It can be up to 21 days but does not need to be that long befor symptons show. When this happens, where will they be? In a crowded subway? Eating in a restaurant that might not clean the tables as well as they should? Will they be at a park where kids play? So what happens when one of these Ebola exposed people make a mistake, get careless, or dustracted and harms or kills someone else? The CDC says droplets from sneezing can spread Ebola, it also says it can survive several hours on door knobs and tables but several days in body fluids like blood.
So they wake at 6am, take thier temp twice a day (6am then 6pm) but starts with symtoms like feaver at noon while eating lunch at their favorite deli. They then go biking which also fatigues the body as most excercise does, stop by a park and rest on a bench, whipe the sweat from their forehead and then get a drink from the fountain. Now 6 hours has passed and you cannot in any way shape or form tell anyone how many people got infected, could have been infected, or unknowingly was infected and infects others.
Duncan came from a place with Ebola most likely knowing he had Ebola. It is highly probable that he instructed his family on what not to do as well as took steps himself not to spread it.. I would consider that to be an off case because the general public does not know who you are, if you are infected, and i have yet to hear that duncan was eating breakfast at the table with the kids, lounging on the furnature and interacting with the family as normal people would. In fact, we have been told he did none of those things and stayed in the bedroom which the family avoided.
These people running around are in completely different scenarios.
And don't you remember your mom scolding you when you pulled some bone headed stunt and she ended up saying "I hope you are proud of yourself" in an attempt to shame you?
In this context, every time someone says they are proud of themselves, I think of the time I put a PB&J sandwich in the slot for the betamax tapes when I was 4 or 5 or the time I scotch taped a bunch of tampons to the family cat because I over heard dad saying something and took it the wrong way. And yes, strangely enough, I was proud of myself until I got the ass whipping I deserved.
I wouldn't consider that a homophobic asshole comment. I mean do people think their statements exist in a void where they only apply to some things but not all that they would otherwise fit generally tight with?
If you were born that way, others can be born "their" way too. If it is unconstitutional to ban gay marriage because of equal rights, it is also unconstitutional to ban polygamy, incest (without intent to reproduce) and possibly several other things. The arguments made simply are not limited to the topics of the arguments. Another example, abortion, Roe.V.Wade made it unconstitutional to ban abortions relying largely on the 14th amendment saying a right to privacy existed because of the due process clause in it. But what is uncertain is if government health care or Obamacare (PPACA) invalidates that right to privacy claim because it is now the government's concern about what health care you have and treatments that can be performed associated with it.
So it is a legitimate inquiry to want to explore and understand how these arguments and laws being passed impact other aspects of society that has been taboo or forbidden also. IF there is a legitimate reason why they cannot be used, then it is perfectly fine to state it. IF there isn't, then it is still fine, we just have to have another reason or way to discriminate against that which we do not like.
General abuse, because it happened does not mean acceptable. It was and still is illegal to beat anyone regardless of if they were gay or strait or black or white or chines. At least during any of our lifetimes. Hell, it is even illegal to beat the holy hell out of an enemy soldier who just spent the last half hour trying to kill you.
Hell, in 1998, there was a national/international outcry against the murder of Mathew Shepard- a gay 22 year old who was robbed, pistol whipped, and tortured, then left hanging on a fence to die because of a bad drug deal.
Bullshit..lol. Way to take your thinking cap off and burrying where you won't find it for a good long while.
The reason you cannot shoot firearms inside the city limits is because people make mistakes and miss their targets sending stray bullets that could harm or kill someone else. This is no different because she could be mistaken and infect others or worse yet, infect the wildlife which will infect others.
FFS, are you so daft that you cannot even look up something as simple as ebola and animals? All we need to do to start our own epidemic is to infect some animals. Can you ensure that would nevrr be possible to happen? I mean use you freaking brain. You cannot, this chik on a bike cannot, and the tests for ebola are not completely accurate when symptoms aren't showing. You also cannot control when symptomsvwill manifest and you are contageous either.
No, its the same. But since the TSA already fondles grandma, then its a no brainer to quarentine them if for nothing other than the public's peace of mind. And yes, that is more or less why you cannot legally discharge a firearm inside the city limits or hunt within so many feet of a home in most states.
Then your fantasies would be correct for the first time. But ignoring any other impending supernatural disaster, can you positively say with accuracy that it is impossible for anyone else to get it if she happens to be a carrier without or just begining to show symptoms? Read the post beside yours if you need a more plausible scenario.
Or, shes outvriding her bike, cuts herself and bleeds a bit. An animal sniffs the blood and because infected, and because animals do not practice the same hygenes as humans, pass it along where it ends up infecting humans.
You don't think there is some powerful being in africa saying you need punished so here is an Ebola outbreak every 10 or 20 years do you?
Why is it that people in africa cannot follow science or these top expert's advice? Why is it that all 3 people mentioned above bt the GP have demonstrated that they cannot follow the science? Why is it that with everyone being an expert and the science already settled, is the outbreak still happening and people who know better are getting infected?
Here is the problem which is the same problem that happens in engineering, software development, sports, and quit a bit of other things in life as we know it. What works on paper, what works in theory, does not always work in practice. There are a number of reasons for this, a lot of them may not even be in your control. We just had a rocket explode on launch and i'm certain that everyone involved thought they did everything correctly, everything was right- until it was obvious it wasn't.
Almost- if not every state that requires a drivers license also requires the use of a seat belt for at least the driver when operating a car. Cars are completely safe and damage is rare when the rules are followed yet people mess it up all the time.
The experts can say anything they want. The mortality rate with Ebola is sky high compare to getting cancer and dieing from smoking yet we banchildren from doing it and restrict where people can smoke. Doing the bare minimum with Ebola is not rational considering the risks results in death more often than not. Statistically, you are less likely to die from a gunshot if a gun is shot around you than you are if you get Ebola. Quarentine is akin to wearing seatbelts, to laws against discharging firearms in certain areas, to smoking in certain areas, to wearing helmets while operating motorcycles.
Lo my troll is back. I thought you got Ebola and died or something after that last spanking you got.
Well, you are wrong as usual and fail to provide anything of value to the conversation. The world just lost 20 IQ points simply because of your post. I hope you are satisfied.
It is absolutely no different than congress saying you can do X unless you are religious. If it is availible to anyone, it must be availible to anyone regardless of their religion, or skin color, or anything else the constitution prohibits government from discriminating.
I hate to tell you but that site is no more accurate that someone trying to claim their religion is real. It makes assumption in specific ways in order to contrive its explaining away.
False implies you take it for fact. The problem is that the majority of what i first saw while skimming through it can be explained away as false too. Don't get caught up into belief around it.
They probably have a newer and nicer car than you. I remember as a teen, going to visit a girl form school who lived in a low income government housing project. My 15 year old beater was actually in decent shape (faded paint, no dents, tires matched and had decent tread, engine ran smooth) but everyone at the complex had a 5 year old or newer car and some actually made fun of mine.
Some mysteries in life will never get solved I guess. I delivered pizzas for a while too and saw all sorts of nice and new cars in the low income areas. So many that I doubt they were there looking to score some crack or something illicit. They belonged there.
What the Catholic Church did to Galileo had nothing to do with science. Galileo attacked and ridiculed the church and pope for saying his works needed more proof (which it did) and that is why what happened did happen to Galileo.
Outside of locking down the internet to protect the citizens, the only other real recourse would be to counter attack China or Russia or whomever they decided to blame. Red lines fade away but I doubt this administration wants to escalate anything or make a scene large enough that others will demand it escalate the situation.
The only reasons it would be different if the Koch brothers did it would be in your mind or because it could be used politically to their benefit with no chance of escalation turning into war.
Damn straight. But being that it is the USA and the government, the security should have been guarded by Jack Bower and this never should have happened.
Nowhere in the first amendment does it say "at a personal level". Nowhere in the first amendment does it say congress can make a law baring certain activities by a religion that are legal for others like opening a theme park and attracting tourist. In fact, the first amendment specifically bars that.
As I said, you better read that first amendment again.
You better read that first amendment again. You are trying to say free speech unless it is religious speech, then it is no speech. That is of coursevif you insist the first is a separation clause. It is not because congress can make no law endorsing or ptohibiting a religion on any level.
Now what makes that apply to the states is the 14th which makes it clear that if sny citizen has a right under the law, all citizens have that right under any law. And congress cannot discriminate based on the free exercise of a religion because they would be prohibiting it.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, it's a not true scottsman situation. Many people identify themselves with one of the two major parties but do absolutely nothing to participate with them. For instance, a low income single mother is more likely to vote democrat if they ever voted. They however, may not have ever voted, do not even know the names of politicians running, or the names of politicians already seated in office. They likely registered to vote at one time because it was easy and secondary to something they were already doing like renewing a drivers license. Likewise, someone of the same situation who is too proud to take assistance, perhaps thinks their situation is exaggerated because taxes are high or something, might vote republican but still suffer the same participation issues.
Now, republicans, just like democrats, who are real republicans and democrats would vote without needing to be reminded. It's the people who do not vote, who do not care about politics and couldn't tell you who Joe Biden is,that need reminding to vote because they are the new independents. If you can get enough idiots (as used with Athenian democracy) to show up and cast a vote, all you need to do is get the rights ones to show and you have increased the party's chances enormously. This is where the reminders to vote come into play. And yes, face book has already combed through postings to see the political leanings of it's users and could pick the right people to remind in order to influence their positions or party picks.
And i wish governments would get out of the way in excess of what is needed to create a thriving society that all can participate in and the poir can litterally lift themselves out of poverty as soon as they understand what does not work.
Lets keep whishing and complaining because your vision is incompatible with mine and mine seems to take too much power from government to be a reality.
Yes in a litteral sense depending on income and job. But also yes in a figurative sense because of compulsory primary education or public schools.
I don't have to worry about it anyways, I'm not in Maine and I'm sure someone else would kill her if she ended up killing/infecting others. But you should be worried about it. The WHO says Ebola can stay alive for days in blood. They also say that wild animals get Ebola and infect humans. So that fantasy is actually real life in other parts of the world.
No, it is not false. A proficient shooter with capable back stopping presents not even the slightests risk of stray bullets hitting anything other than what was intended.
So what happens is people make mistakes, get careless, or even distracted and bad things happen. Now here is your problem. It can be up to 21 days but does not need to be that long befor symptons show. When this happens, where will they be? In a crowded subway? Eating in a restaurant that might not clean the tables as well as they should? Will they be at a park where kids play? So what happens when one of these Ebola exposed people make a mistake, get careless, or dustracted and harms or kills someone else? The CDC says droplets from sneezing can spread Ebola, it also says it can survive several hours on door knobs and tables but several days in body fluids like blood.
So they wake at 6am, take thier temp twice a day (6am then 6pm) but starts with symtoms like feaver at noon while eating lunch at their favorite deli. They then go biking which also fatigues the body as most excercise does, stop by a park and rest on a bench, whipe the sweat from their forehead and then get a drink from the fountain. Now 6 hours has passed and you cannot in any way shape or form tell anyone how many people got infected, could have been infected, or unknowingly was infected and infects others.
Duncan came from a place with Ebola most likely knowing he had Ebola. It is highly probable that he instructed his family on what not to do as well as took steps himself not to spread it.. I would consider that to be an off case because the general public does not know who you are, if you are infected, and i have yet to hear that duncan was eating breakfast at the table with the kids, lounging on the furnature and interacting with the family as normal people would. In fact, we have been told he did none of those things and stayed in the bedroom which the family avoided.
These people running around are in completely different scenarios.
That's right..
And don't you remember your mom scolding you when you pulled some bone headed stunt and she ended up saying "I hope you are proud of yourself" in an attempt to shame you?
In this context, every time someone says they are proud of themselves, I think of the time I put a PB&J sandwich in the slot for the betamax tapes when I was 4 or 5 or the time I scotch taped a bunch of tampons to the family cat because I over heard dad saying something and took it the wrong way. And yes, strangely enough, I was proud of myself until I got the ass whipping I deserved.
I wouldn't consider that a homophobic asshole comment. I mean do people think their statements exist in a void where they only apply to some things but not all that they would otherwise fit generally tight with?
If you were born that way, others can be born "their" way too. If it is unconstitutional to ban gay marriage because of equal rights, it is also unconstitutional to ban polygamy, incest (without intent to reproduce) and possibly several other things. The arguments made simply are not limited to the topics of the arguments. Another example, abortion, Roe.V.Wade made it unconstitutional to ban abortions relying largely on the 14th amendment saying a right to privacy existed because of the due process clause in it. But what is uncertain is if government health care or Obamacare (PPACA) invalidates that right to privacy claim because it is now the government's concern about what health care you have and treatments that can be performed associated with it.
So it is a legitimate inquiry to want to explore and understand how these arguments and laws being passed impact other aspects of society that has been taboo or forbidden also. IF there is a legitimate reason why they cannot be used, then it is perfectly fine to state it. IF there isn't, then it is still fine, we just have to have another reason or way to discriminate against that which we do not like.
General abuse, because it happened does not mean acceptable. It was and still is illegal to beat anyone regardless of if they were gay or strait or black or white or chines. At least during any of our lifetimes. Hell, it is even illegal to beat the holy hell out of an enemy soldier who just spent the last half hour trying to kill you.
Hell, in 1998, there was a national/international outcry against the murder of Mathew Shepard- a gay 22 year old who was robbed, pistol whipped, and tortured, then left hanging on a fence to die because of a bad drug deal.
In many states, you are forbidden from riding a motorcycle without a helmet. You will be fined if you do not have one.
In fact, there seems to be only 2 states that do not have restrictions on operating a motorcycle without a helmet.
http://www.bikersrights.com/st...
Bullshit..lol. Way to take your thinking cap off and burrying where you won't find it for a good long while.
The reason you cannot shoot firearms inside the city limits is because people make mistakes and miss their targets sending stray bullets that could harm or kill someone else. This is no different because she could be mistaken and infect others or worse yet, infect the wildlife which will infect others.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre...
FFS, are you so daft that you cannot even look up something as simple as ebola and animals? All we need to do to start our own epidemic is to infect some animals. Can you ensure that would nevrr be possible to happen? I mean use you freaking brain. You cannot, this chik on a bike cannot, and the tests for ebola are not completely accurate when symptoms aren't showing. You also cannot control when symptomsvwill manifest and you are contageous either.
No, its the same. But since the TSA already fondles grandma, then its a no brainer to quarentine them if for nothing other than the public's peace of mind. And yes, that is more or less why you cannot legally discharge a firearm inside the city limits or hunt within so many feet of a home in most states.
Then your fantasies would be correct for the first time. But ignoring any other impending supernatural disaster, can you positively say with accuracy that it is impossible for anyone else to get it if she happens to be a carrier without or just begining to show symptoms? Read the post beside yours if you need a more plausible scenario.
Or, shes outvriding her bike, cuts herself and bleeds a bit. An animal sniffs the blood and because infected, and because animals do not practice the same hygenes as humans, pass it along where it ends up infecting humans.
You don't think there is some powerful being in africa saying you need punished so here is an Ebola outbreak every 10 or 20 years do you?
Why is it that people in africa cannot follow science or these top expert's advice? Why is it that all 3 people mentioned above bt the GP have demonstrated that they cannot follow the science? Why is it that with everyone being an expert and the science already settled, is the outbreak still happening and people who know better are getting infected?
Here is the problem which is the same problem that happens in engineering, software development, sports, and quit a bit of other things in life as we know it. What works on paper, what works in theory, does not always work in practice. There are a number of reasons for this, a lot of them may not even be in your control. We just had a rocket explode on launch and i'm certain that everyone involved thought they did everything correctly, everything was right- until it was obvious it wasn't.
Almost- if not every state that requires a drivers license also requires the use of a seat belt for at least the driver when operating a car. Cars are completely safe and damage is rare when the rules are followed yet people mess it up all the time.
The experts can say anything they want. The mortality rate with Ebola is sky high compare to getting cancer and dieing from smoking yet we banchildren from doing it and restrict where people can smoke. Doing the bare minimum with Ebola is not rational considering the risks results in death more often than not. Statistically, you are less likely to die from a gunshot if a gun is shot around you than you are if you get Ebola. Quarentine is akin to wearing seatbelts, to laws against discharging firearms in certain areas, to smoking in certain areas, to wearing helmets while operating motorcycles.
Lo my troll is back. I thought you got Ebola and died or something after that last spanking you got.
Well, you are wrong as usual and fail to provide anything of value to the conversation. The world just lost 20 IQ points simply because of your post. I hope you are satisfied.
It is absolutely no different than congress saying you can do X unless you are religious. If it is availible to anyone, it must be availible to anyone regardless of their religion, or skin color, or anything else the constitution prohibits government from discriminating.
I hate to tell you but that site is no more accurate that someone trying to claim their religion is real. It makes assumption in specific ways in order to contrive its explaining away.
False implies you take it for fact. The problem is that the majority of what i first saw while skimming through it can be explained away as false too. Don't get caught up into belief around it.
They probably have a newer and nicer car than you. I remember as a teen, going to visit a girl form school who lived in a low income government housing project. My 15 year old beater was actually in decent shape (faded paint, no dents, tires matched and had decent tread, engine ran smooth) but everyone at the complex had a 5 year old or newer car and some actually made fun of mine.
Some mysteries in life will never get solved I guess. I delivered pizzas for a while too and saw all sorts of nice and new cars in the low income areas. So many that I doubt they were there looking to score some crack or something illicit. They belonged there.
What the Catholic Church did to Galileo had nothing to do with science. Galileo attacked and ridiculed the church and pope for saying his works needed more proof (which it did) and that is why what happened did happen to Galileo.
Outside of locking down the internet to protect the citizens, the only other real recourse would be to counter attack China or Russia or whomever they decided to blame. Red lines fade away but I doubt this administration wants to escalate anything or make a scene large enough that others will demand it escalate the situation.
The only reasons it would be different if the Koch brothers did it would be in your mind or because it could be used politically to their benefit with no chance of escalation turning into war.
Damn straight. But being that it is the USA and the government, the security should have been guarded by Jack Bower and this never should have happened.
Sigh.. I know exactly what his comment said.
Nowhere in the first amendment does it say "at a personal level". Nowhere in the first amendment does it say congress can make a law baring certain activities by a religion that are legal for others like opening a theme park and attracting tourist. In fact, the first amendment specifically bars that.
As I said, you better read that first amendment again.
You better read that first amendment again. You are trying to say free speech unless it is religious speech, then it is no speech. That is of coursevif you insist the first is a separation clause. It is not because congress can make no law endorsing or ptohibiting a religion on any level.
Now what makes that apply to the states is the 14th which makes it clear that if sny citizen has a right under the law, all citizens have that right under any law. And congress cannot discriminate based on the free exercise of a religion because they would be prohibiting it.